Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

JOINT COMMITTEE ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GOOD FRIDAY AGREEMENT díospóireacht -
Thursday, 9 Sep 2010

Report of Bloody Sunday Inquiry: Discussion

Ba mhaith liom fíor chaoin fáilte a chur roimh ionadaithe teallaigh Domhnach na Fola ó Tuaisceart na tíre. Le linn 40 bliain, tá na daoine cróga uasal seo ag obair go crua ag iarraidh réitigh a fháil ar an fhadhb mhór a bhaineann leis na teallaigh go léir. Táimid go léir sásta go bhfuil siad anseo linn inniu.

I warmly welcome everybody here today, particularly our colleagues from the Northern Ireland Assembly, namely, Mr. Mark Durkan, MP, Mr. Pat Doherty, MP, and Dr. Alasdair McDonnell, MP. The main item on the agenda today is the Saville inquiry report. The Saville inquiry, also known as the Bloody Sunday Inquiry was set up in 1998 by the then British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, following intensive campaigns for a second inquiry by the families of those killed and injured by British troops in Derry on 30 June 1972. The final report of the inquiry was published on 15 June this year.

I am very pleased to warmly welcome the members of those families who have campaigned so bravely and with so much dignity for more than 38 years, almost four decades, in their quest for the truth. I welcome in particular Mr. Mickey McKinney, whose 27 year old brother, Willie, was shot dead in Glenfada Park, Derry, on Bloody Sunday. I should also like to welcome Mr. Gerry Duddy, whose brother Jackie, was shot dead on Bloody Sunday in the courtyard of Rossville Flats. Jackie was the first person to be shot dead on Bloody Sunday. I also welcome Mr. John Kelly, whose 17 year old brother, Michael, was shot dead at the rubble barricade in Rossville Street. I welcome, too, Mr. Tony Doherty, whose father, Patrick, then aged just 31, was shot dead in front of Rossville Flats as he tried to crawl to safety.

Members of the committee will recall that we met here on 24 March this year with Mr. McKinney and Mr. Duddy. I am delighted that we have the opportunity to meet with them again today, along with Mr. Kelly and Mr. Doherty. When we last met, the families had serious concerns regarding the then delays in the publication of the report and arrangements for access to the report for the families and their lawyers on the day of the publication. Matters have moved on significantly since then.

On 15 June last, 38 years after the events of Bloody Sunday, those who were injured or killed and their families were finally vindicated with the acknowledgement that the deaths and injuries were unjustified and unjustifiable. There is no longer any doubt that the Widgery report had not told the true story, or indeed anything close to it. Members of the committee will be interested to hear the views of the families on the report, now that they have had some time to digest it more fully. They will also hear the families' view on British Prime Minister David Cameron's statement and on other reactions since then.

Before we commence I remind members of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person outside the Houses or an official by name or in such a manner as to make him or her identifiable. By virtue of section 17(2)(i) of the Defamation Act 2009 witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to this committee. If you are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence in relation to a particular matter and you continue to so do, you are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of your evidence. You are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and you are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, you should not criticise or make charges against any person or persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

It is a great pleasure to call on our guests to address this committee and we shall start with Mr. Mickey McKinney.

Mr. Mickey McKinney

I should like to just generalise. On 3 January 1972 the British Government sent information to all its embassies across the world to say that its troops were engaged in a gun battle with the IRA, that afternoon. Since that day, we, the Bloody Sunday relatives, have been chasing a lie, up until 15 June this year.

We, on 15 June, got our message out to the world and along with Lord Saville's report have corrected the lie and turned things around. Lord Saville has told the world that what we had been saying for 38 years was actually true. The date, 15 June, was a great day for us and for Derry. It was very important, although we did not need Lord Saville to have to tell us that our people were totally innocent of the terrible allegations that were made against them in 1972. The British Government did what it is best at, and had the first strike, in 1972.

Lord Saville's report has vindicated all our relatives and all the wounded. It stops at Colonel Wilford, and does not go any higher, however, and we have great concerns as regards that. We have always believed that this went much higher than Colonel Wilford. Other people in the British army were employed that day to control the troops, and they did not control them. We have great concerns as regards what he says about Gerard Donaghey. Our view is that the report is wrong in what it says about Gerard Donaghey, as regards nail bombs. We do not agree with that. There are positive outcomes from the process. What I see as a positive is that all our people have been declared innocent of the terrible allegations laid against them 38 years ago.

Thank you, Mr. McKinney, for your contribution.

Mr. Tony Doherty

What McKinney is saying is that there are two separate issues that can be viewed together. The first issue is the report. The previous time Mr. McKinney and Mr. Gerry Duddy were here, some weeks in advance of 15 June, nobody knew or had any indication or clue as to what would be in the report. Neither did we have an indication as to how the new British Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron would deal with the import of the report. As members will be aware, the report was made public on 15 June 2010 in Derry and Westminster and that was a joyous day for everybody who witnessed it and who played a part in it. We are on record as saying the report vindicated the innocence of all the people who were killed and wounded on that day. That was the core of our grievance since 1972 and was the core of our campaign since then. It has been said that there is no such thing as a perfect victory. I concur with that in the context of what happened in Derry on Bloody Sunday.

The report has been described as being good on identifying innocence but not so good at identifying guilt. As Mr. McKinney stated, we believe the findings could have been more conclusive and could have more evidence based on who had directed the soldiers that day and afterwards. We accept, however, that the report is done and has vindicated all of our loved ones and all those who were wounded. That is a major achievement.

People in Derry describe the day the report was issued as a victory for us. That is not triumphalism. People had fought for a long time to have what happened on Bloody Sunday investigated and were glad that we had succeeded in bringing this about. From our point of view, we were pleased not only with the content and detail of the report, but how it was received by the Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron and the members of the House of Commons. It was the first time in British-Irish relations that a British Prime Minister apologised for an atrocity carried out in his country's name against innocent Irish people. That is a major political precedent.

The Saville inquiry was established by the then Tory Prime Minister and nobody thought that a Tory Prime Minister would be capable of articulating the words that were used on that day and the forthright manner in which he described what Lord Saville had said about the atrocity and how he, on behalf of his government, accepted and fully acknowledged that the British army had carried out illegal killings that were unjustifiable. The tone of the Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron, has gone a long way to make people feel much better and has brought closure to those dealing with the fall-out from this atrocity. In the context of the peace process, it was one of the most memorable days and by and large it has copperfastened the peace process. As relatives of those killed and wounded on Bloody Sunday, our point is that if we are to have just and lasting peace the core issues and the unfinished business of the conflict will have to be resolved and Bloody Sunday was absolutely key to that. That premise has been manifestly accepted and we welcomed that on the steps of the Guildhall on 15 June. We also acknowledged on 15 June that we are not alone in terms of our quest for truth, that other groups seeking justice in Belfast and Dublin-Monaghan are asking the same questions on what has happened to them. Their campaigns do not seem to have been moved on.

We acknowledge the enormity and the totality of suffering for all who have been bereaved by the conflict regardless of who killed them and that goes across the full spectrum of suffering in the North since the 1960s. We are not selfish or ungracious about the major achievement of 15 June. There is still work to be done. We still have questions for our legal teams, the question of the culpability of not just the State but the individual soldiers who carried out the unjustified and unjustifiable killings on Bloody Sunday. It is clear also that there are differences of opinion on the question of prosecution, and some families, including my own have declared that we are not interested in pursuing prosecution of the soldiers who killed our loved ones. That is a perfectly legitimate stance. However, other families believe quite legitimately that there should be prosecutions and that is fair if there is the evidence to prosecute.

Arising from the apology of 15 June, the people of Derry and Ireland now have to deal with the issue of remembrance and legacy. Now that the British have addressed a core issue stemming from the conflict and a major causal factor of the conflict, where does that leave British-Irish relations? Clearly there is a major international dimension to what has been brought about in terms of the resolution of conflict.

Other issues were addressed on 15 June. The first is that whatever honours were bestowed on soldiers by the British Queen in the months following Bloody Sunday need to be removed. Colonel Wilford, who was in command of soldiers on the ground on Bloody Sunday, was decorated in the Queen's Honours List in January 1973. The atrocity of Bloody Sunday was vindicated in a sense to the British public, and that needs to be dealt with effectively. Our view is that it should be withdrawn forthwith. I understand that there is an honours forfeiture committee in the House of Commons that assesses whether royal honours should be withdrawn. That will be an important step in the undoing of the atrocity of Bloody Sunday, as it is still legitimised to some extent by the honours.

The other issue is in respect of perjury. While we have a difference of opinion on prosecution for murder arising from the events of Bloody Sunday, we feel that the key issue of how soldiers, officers and policemen behaved at the Saville inquiry needs to be resolved as well. Many of the legal people involved in the inquiry are of the view that many of the soldiers perjured themselves disgracefully when giving evidence to the inquiry.

I would like to thank the people of this committee and the last three or four taoisigh who have campaigned, lobbied and worked through the Department of Foreign Affairs and other Departments on our behalf, in order to ensure that the island of Ireland deals effectively with this event. Had it not been for the interventions of various Governments over the past 20 years or so, we would probably not be here today, and I would like to acknowledge that.

Mr. Gerry Duddy

The families all agree with what Mr. Doherty and Mr. McKinney have said. On a personal note, I would like to say that 15 June was one of the happiest days of my life, but it was also one of the saddest days of my life. I could stand up in front of the Derry Guildhall and tell the world my brother was innocent, something for which we fought so long and hard. I hope we can help other families out there who have gone through the same thing.

I thank committee members for helping us and meeting with us over the years, along with the likes of Mark Durkan MP, Pat Doherty MP and other parties for all their support over the years. That is all I can say.

Mr. John Kelly

I want to thank everyone for inviting us down to talk to the committee. Our campaign goes back many years. It took us 38 and a half years to get to where we were on 15 June. I remember the first meeting we had with somebody from the Irish Government and that was Dick Spring, and it was a long time ago. He met us in Dublin and that was the beginning of the process between us and the Irish Government. We went through the three taoisigh, John Bruton, Bertie Ahern and Brian Cowen, so we have worked a lot over the years with the Irish Government. The inquiry lasted seven years and the Irish Government had somebody there on a daily basis as an observer, taking note of every word that was said, and I would like to thank the observer for that. I could go on and thank people like Gerry Cribben and Eamonn McKee, who produced an assessment on the Widgery tribunal, but all these things came together to put pressure on the British Government to reopen the case.

It was not just the families who had a great day on 15 June, but the whole city of Derry. It was a massive victory for us and for the whole of Ireland. Without the support of the people of Ireland, we would never have achieved what we did achieve. A process of healing is occurring. On 16 June, three leaders of the Protestant churches came and met the Bloody Sunday families in the Bogside. It was a major point of reconciliation between the Bogside and the Protestant churches and it was a major step on their behalf. Although we met people from the Protestant churches in the past, they were not as forthcoming in showing their support in public. After 15 June, the timing was perfect for that sort of thing to happen. Things are healing gradually and the city of Derry is still celebrating the outcome. Hopefully, this will continue.

Other things remain to be sorted. Prosecutions and perjury are part of this. While some of us may have a difference of opinion on prosecution, we must respect that. There are 28 families involved and we have endured each other for the past 38 and a half years. The families will work together, will respect everybody's viewpoint, and hopefully we will some day have full closure on the incident itself.

We will open the debate up for committee members, and I have speakers so far who have indicated a wish to speak. I call on Deputy Ó Caoláin first.

I join with you, a Chathaoirligh, in extending a warm welcome to each of our guests this morning. It has been a wonderful presentation by each of the four speakers. I have listened carefully to their analysis of what has taken place, the detail of the statements, the report on and the reaction to 15 June 2010. It is a date that probably will have as strong a resonance and recognition factor as 30 January 1972. I welcome the opportunity to meet with them at this stage and I want to recognise the courage, the determination and the tenacity of all the families they represent this morning. It has been an absolutely magnificent achievment on the part of the families, the survivors and the broad population of the city of Derry, in campaigning for justice in the name of those who were killed and injured on that day. It is not an overstatement to say that their efforts, and the efforts of those who have supported them, have shone as a beacon for justice and truth in Ireland and around the world. The story of the Bloody Sunday relatives campaign is universally recognised and respected. I would like to say "well done" to each and every one of them for that.

We were pleased to have played a small part in ensuring there was adequate relatives' scrutiny, which was the request made by Mr. McKinney and Mr. Duddy when we last met here in the Houses of the Oireachtas. We were pleased when that request was acceded to subsequently, and supportive access for all the families on the morning of 15 June was granted.

I fully concur with what the witnesses have said about the statement by the British Prime Minister on that day in the British Parliament. It was a significant statement and no less so because he is a Tory British Prime Minister. That must be acknowledged once again. However, I described elements of the report in the subsequent Dáil opportunity as carefully crafted and precisely worded. Of that I have no doubt. It is not confined to our views as Irish republicans, all views across the island of Ireland find difference with the British Prime Minister's claims in respect of the British armed forces' role in the Six Counties, which he described as upholding democracy and the rule of law. I strongly disagree with that and the contrary has been the truth all along. We must carefully consider David Cameron's statement.

When he speaks of the role of the British Government and of the British army commanders in respect of Bloody Sunday, he states, according to my précised notes, that "those looking for premeditation, those looking for a plan, those looking for a conspiracy involving senior politicians or senior members of the armed forces" will not find it in the Saville report. However, he was able to state, "the Government is ultimately responsible for the conduct of the armed forces" and it was on the back of this that he based his fulsome apology, which I acknowledge. There is a gap between the two.

We have heard what relatives had to say and we note the cohesion and unanimity of their approach, except in one specific area. I asked relatives if they agree that the two statements by the British Prime Minister in the address in the House of Commons on that day are not bridged by the Saville report. It is in that context that the Saville report is at its weakest. Do the witnesses agree the gap in the report is in its silence on responsibility for the killings and where that rests in terms of the highest military and political level within the military and political establishment in Britain? There is a significant gap and it cannot find closure at the senior British soldier in regard to what took place on the day by the parachute regiment. There can be no question but that it goes beyond that. Have the witnesses been able to agree steps to get beyond that point, acknowledged in the Saville report? What is the next step the witnesses propose taking and what steps do they urge us, as elected voices of the Irish people, North and South, representative of the whole island of Ireland, to help and support the objectives of the remaining elements the witnesses would like to see achieved in order to absolutely effect closure?

With the Chair's indulgence, I thank Mr. Tony Doherty who made reference to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. It would be remiss of me, as a Deputy for the constituency of Cavan-Monaghan, not to say that I am deeply disappointed that since the last time the committee met, the Irish Government has taken the decision to cease the funding stream to Justice for the Forgotten. The office that has been campaigning for many years in Lower Gardiner Street is no longer functioning. It is just collecting telephone messages but is not open or functioning. In the important and courageous role of reflecting the efforts of relatives of the Bloody Sunday victims and the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and those who have worked so closely with them, such as Margaret Urwin, its efforts are significantly curtailed. It is most regrettable that they are the only campaigning group for victims of the conflict with regard to victims on this side of the Border and that while there are strong, welcome and understandable statements of praise for all that has been achieved in Derry, at the same time a decision was taken to cut funding for a campaigning group that has yet to reach the point of truth and justice on behalf of victims, where the greatest number of people died in any single incident over the entirety of 30 years of conflict on this island, and it is not in a position to further its efforts in a co-ordinated, cohesive way through the use of that office facility. It is very regrettable and if the Chair and the committee agree, even at this late stage, a further appeal from this committee could go to the Taoiseach and the Minister for Justice and Law Reform, who corresponded on this matter with me this week, indicating regret that because of the current financial difficulties the decision had to be taken. It is most regrettable and I ask the indulgence of the Chair and the support of the committee for a further appeal on the back of the visit by Mr. Mickey McKinney, Mr. John Kelly, Mr. Gerry Duddy and Mr. Tony Doherty.

Like the previous speaker, I warmly welcome the witnesses to Dublin. What took place in 1972 was a terrible atrocity. The event is so long ago that I was not born at the time. This year, 15 June is a day that will be etched in my mind. It was a very moving day in Derry for anyone looking in. There were scenes of jubilation and sadness as some have said already. I agree with the sentiments of Deputy Ó Caoláin in regard to the statements made in the House of Commons. It is timely to invite Mr. Owen Paterson to a meeting of this committee, possibly with the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Michéal Martin. We could have a timely debate on this report.

There are many similarities between this report and the Eames-Bradley report, some of the recommendations and what took place in the past 38 years. Some of the healing to which the witnesses referred has taken place since 15 June and there are many similarities and there is much to learn from the Saville report. Mr. Owen Paterson has been good in coming to visit Members from all parties and all sides and this is a good time to invite him to our next meeting. It would lead to a constructive discussion and we can see if we can move on the Saville report and the Eames-Bradley report, which is sitting in limbo over one of the recommendations.

Mr. Pat Doherty, MLA, MP

I welcome the witnesses. It may seem strange for me to welcome them here when I am more used to meeting them in Derry. I would also like to acknowledge their courage and endurance over the 38 years, and that of all the families, friends and relatives. It has been a magnificent example of how endurance and courage will triumph and eventually bring forward the truth, if not all of the truth. The presentation was very clear and straightforward. It was also challenging. The Saville report was a massive step forward. I was very taken by Mr. Doherty's comments that it was good on innocence and bad on guilt. All of us who have lived through the conflict know it did not stop at Colonel Wilford, and that all of the events that had happened in Belfast and elsewhere in the months before were part of a wider British Government strategy to crush the resistance for national self-determination. We all know that Gerard Donaghey did not carry nail bombs. Those issues have to be resolved.

The British must look at the fact that after Bloody Sunday they honoured many of the soldiers. Presentations were made by the Queen. I was taken by the fact that Mr. Doherty knows of a committee in Westminster that could take away those honours; not that I intend to go to Westminster but that committee might have tempted me. Mr. McDonnell, MP, is grinning.

Dr. Alasdair McDonnell, MLA, MP

Mr. Doherty is there all the time. What is he talking about?

Mr. Pat Doherty, MLA, MP

What is the committee called?

Mr. Tony Doherty

The Honours Forfeiture Committee.

Mr. Pat Doherty, MLA, MP

Many things could go in that direction.

Whatever about the historical stuff that we all know, a pertinent point was made that during the inquiry it was very clear given the outcome, that many members of the armed forces perjured themselves and for people examining the matter, this has to be the basis of a legal challenge. It is not only me or another republican stating this; it is the report stating it. The conclusion of the report clearly states those people told lies. This is another huge challenge for the British Government and if the witnesses get a chance to respond to this, I would like them to elaborate on the matter of perjury.

I thank the witnesses and I thank the committee for this opportunity. Deputy Blaney stated he was not alive in 1972 and I was a toddling three year old at the time. My granddad might or might not have had a pub at the time on Strand Road. Subsequently he did not but that is another day's work.

Watching the television here on 15 June and switching from station to station was strange and very emotional. The jubilance, happiness and sadness made a mixture of emotions for those of us on the periphery and I cannot imagine how powerful it must have been for the people at the core. I agree with removing the decorations from those who were decorated; it goes without saying.

It is dangerous to mention names but somebody who cannot be ignored is Bishop Daly; it is hoped that he will be set free as he has spent 40 years as Father Daly who had the white hanky. I once interviewed him about something completely different, which was on how we deal with conflict and how we teach history in areas of post-conflict. He made the point that practically every day a comment about 1972 is made to him by a radio or television station in some part of the world. I spent approximately an hour with him and during that time he received two phone calls from two different people with regard to documentaries.

The witnesses have lived and breathed this for so long that they have gained expertise for all the wrong reasons in how they were treated and how they would have wanted to be treated. Others are in the same boat at this point in time, such as the people of Omagh. What happened there was more recent but still a long time ago but there is still no conclusion or result. There are also many older conflicts, of the same vintage as Bloody Sunday. What advice do the witnesses have, given their experience, on how we deal with the legacy of the conflict?

I recently listened to someone strongly stating that we are all into getting everybody — a perpetrator or potential perpetrator and victims — into a room to talk it out, and that we will get peace and reconciliation from talking it out. The person I listened to stated his brother was shot and that as far as he was concerned until somebody was in jail for it, he would never feel any better. The witnesses stated they did not need anybody to tell them that their relatives were innocent, but they did because they needed that recognition from outside as much as their own personal beliefs. The man's brother was shot approximately 38 years ago and he still wanted justice, and he used the phrase "rotting in jail for it". He was asked about the fact that many years have passed and he argued that criminals from the Second World War are still being hunted so if something is being done about the 1940s surely something can be done for the 1970s and 1980s.

Can we deal with all of the incidents that took place? Do we need to do so in the same manner as happened with the Saville inquiry? Is it dangerous to try to deal with the past? There are already more questions than answers with regard to Claudy. The witnesses are at the coalface; can one not move on unless one deals with the past? It might not be an easy question but from their personal experience, what is the best way of setting people free? What lessons can we learn?

One of the biggest moments was hearing the British Prime Minister, David Cameron, saying "Derry". It was a very simple thing. It was one word that stuck with me for a long time afterwards. I do not underestimate what the witnesses have been through over the past four decades and nobody would wish the same on anybody and there are lessons we can learn from them. I agree with Deputy Blaney on bringing before the committee the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Mr. Paterson, and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin. What we must learn from the witnesses is how to deal with other events to try to develop peace and reconciliation, how to get the people not only North and South but also east and west working in a more positive way and in a manner signalled by 15 June, and not leave anybody behind if possible.

I would like to be associated with the other speakers in welcoming our guests and I compliment them on their presentation. They waited 38 years until 15 June 2010 to hear the truth. They are very brave people who worked during those years to get the truth on behalf of their loved ones and they must be complimented.

Others here today, such as Mr. Pat Doherty, MLA, MP, Dr. Alasdair McDonnell, MLA, MP, and my colleagues from the Border counties, know much more about this issue than I but it is something with which I have lived for the past 38 years. I was in my early twenties when the events occurred and I can imagine the delegates will remember that awful day for the rest of their lives. It is marvellous to see the truth coming out at long last. Given that they have suffered enough, 15 June must have been a happy day for them. Like Deputy Keaveny, I switched between stations to watch the news that evening. It was a hectic day for the delegates but it was also joyful because they eventually heard the truth. Unfortunately, however, that will not bring back their loved ones. I agree that the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, and the UK Secretary of State for the Northern Ireland Office, Mr. Owen Patterson, MP should be invited to meet us and I am sure the Chairman and committee officials with ensure that happens.

I hope those who were guilty of the atrocity and whoever ordered it will eventually come out because I am sure somebody gave the orders. It was encouraging to hear an apology from the new Prime Minister of Britain for the deeds done on that day. I will not delay the committee because a number of others who wish to contribute have been close to this atrocity down the years. That awful day will always live in my memory and I thank the delegates for their tireless work over the past 38 years to expose the truth.

Mr. Mark Durkan, MLA, MP

It is probably impertinent of me to welcome the delegates, given that I too am attending as a guest. In the course of all they have said, it is important to acknowledge the contribution of the current Taoiseach and his predecessors, as well as Ministers for Foreign Affairs and their officials. In many ways, the quality of the work they did has been overlooked in the reflections that have taken place since then. We are all good at asking what they are doing about this or that or speaking in generic critical or questioning terms about governments and officials but the delegates have helped to inspire motivated and quality work on behalf of this State by officials who are too often traduced or dismissed as faceless bureaucrats. That has continued to the present day with representations not only from the Taoiseach and the Department of Foreign Affairs but from the embassy in London. Work was done around the event of 15 June not only in supporting the families and their representatives in London but also with the current UK Prime Minister while he was leader of the Opposition to ensure he was sensitive to the importance of the Saville report in terms of treating it if he was still in Opposition and, certainly, the need to treat it seriously and sensitively in Government. Credit is due to the ambassador and others in the embassy for that work.

As everyone has noted, 15 June was an important day not only for the families but also for Derry. A huge stone was rolled away. As we saw from the reaction, however, this was a day for the country and not only for the city. Everything I have heard or read since revealed a sense of vindication and a celebration of the families. It also demonstrated the inspiration that the delegates' determination and discipline has offered to many others near and far who face their own challenges in regard to injustices and seeking truth and vindication. This is why it is right that we should consider doing something with 15 June, although perhaps we should not be hasty in our decisions. In addition to having the city commemorate Bloody Sunday on its own date perhaps something could be done on 15 June that does not only include Derry.

I was unable to be in Derry on 15 June because of the statements being made in the House of Commons. One could observe the immediate reaction in terms of hearing the in-take of breath and the place going cold when Mr. David Cameron uttered his words. In fairness to him, he assured me the previous week that, although he did not know the content of the report, he would say what needed to be said as British Prime Minister. He also said he would use the word "Derry". He did that. In addition to the words he used in his statement, it was significant that he sustained a clear, focused and principled line throughout the following hour of questions. Many other issues were raised that invited him to go in different directions. Members representing the military wing of the Tory party and other interests raised issues which, while valid and legitimate, sought to take him in other directions. While he properly acknowledged and respected these other issues he kept returning to the verdict of the Saville report and what it meant for the British state. That reflected well on him but it is really a reflection of what these families have achieved. They were able to move the received British version of Bloody Sunday almost totally with their insistence on an inquiry in the face of all sorts of criticisms and distractions in regard to costs and other issues. Some have suggested since 15 June that David Cameron's statement is significant in that it indicates that a good apology from a British Government would have sufficed. We ought to remember that his statement has currency precisely because it is based on the Saville inquiry's clear verdict on the soldiers' behaviour. If an apology had been issued, no matter how sincere or sophisticated, it would not have had the currency of Mr. David Cameron's statement without resting on a clear judicial examination which effectively and authoritatively repudiated the Widgery report. That needs to be appreciated and understood. When people say we cannot have other inquiries such as Saville, it needs to be remembered that, with some issues, there are no short cuts to the correctives that are required.

As others have said, the report is not so convincing in some of its wider conclusions, perhaps because it did not have all the evidence it needed on matters such as the wider culpability of the state in the way it made its preparations for Bloody Sunday. After Lord Saville concluded his report, but before it was published, the McGreanery family from Derry received the findings of the historical inquiries team in respect of the killing of Billy McGreanery, who was shot dead by a British soldier in Derry in September 1971. The army said he was a gunman but the historical inquiries team has shown that the RUC chief in Derry at the time, Frank Lagan, recommended that the soldier in question be prosecuted for murder. It was also the opinion of a senior officer in RUC headquarters but, in December 1971 and only weeks before Bloody Sunday, the then attorney general decided that no soldier would be prosecuted for any act carried out in the course of duty, thus giving a blanket dispensation. There were other controversies at the time, such as the Ballymurphy killings, but once the attorney general made his decision it became the going rate for army chiefs. The findings of the historical inquiries team were not available to the Saville inquiry and we are left wondering if, had they been available, Lord Saville's conclusions about the wider authorities would have been as neat and as boxed off as they are.

There are other questions that can be asked about the report. Debates will soon be held, first in the House of Lords and then in the House of Commons, which will take many hours. Many people will want to cavil with the Saville report and I fear that there will be some discolouration of its core findings in the media and political circles. I have some concerns about how we handle those debates and their aftermath. Nothing should detract from what was achieved on 15 June which, as Mr. Kelly said, bore remarkable fruit on 16 June.

Mr. Kelly also referred to the powerful gesture, led by Bishop Ken Good, in which Protestant churchmen visited the families. Some people have asked me why that was so significant, as they thought everybody had been talking to everybody else for years. Many people do not appreciate the fact that, for years, the relatives not only had to endure the British state maligning their loved ones and besmirching their innocence but also had to put up with many people, who were otherwise good, righteous and sensitive and included churchmen, diplomats and journalists, relying on the Widgery verdict for their version of the truth of what happened on that day. Each time they approached Bloody Sunday in that way they added to the relatives' grievances in ways that many people do not appreciate. Having to endure that spurred the relatives' quest for justice but did not engender a sense of bitterness or vindictiveness. When people understand all the small, casual untruths and the passing slights they and their loved ones have had to put up with, the vindication and the emancipation of the truth achieved on 15 June, as well as the acknowledgment on 16 June, are very important.

Dr. Alasdair McDonnell, MLA, MP

Given the time constraints I will try to be quick. I welcome our visitors today and compliment and congratulate them and all the Bloody Sunday families for their endurance and the dignity they have shown throughout their 38-year struggle. I have spoken with the families of the Omagh victims and others who have drawn tremendous inspiration from their efforts.

Mr. Doherty said other things had to be sorted before full closure could take place. I am very keen to have a short-list of the things to which he referred, some of which may be achievable while some may not. For example, he mentioned the possibility of honours which had been awarded to soldiers being withdrawn, and referred to the question of perjury by some soldiers. These matters are important in committees of the House of Commons. Yesterday the report was mentioned at the Northern Ireland Affairs Select Committee and Lord Saville will be present on or around 13 October to discuss it before the debates are held. It would be useful if some of the information was put together in a format which could be circulated to people in the House of Commons who might be sympathetic. Questions which come from the families carry more weight than if put by me because I am seen as a practising politician with an axe to grind. I am keen for completion and for the lies of Widgery to be exposed again and again for what they were. There is always an attempt to somehow or another dress up the events of Bloody Sunday and pad them with excuses that in the British context it was an accident or inevitable. There are some army and ex-army types, as Mr. Durkan, MP, rightly suggested, who are now elected as MPs and who will attempt to defend the indefensible.

In summing up, we could perhaps have a little more colour and detail on other actions that could be taken. I would be very keen to hear them.

I will be brief but I welcome our friends here today and thank them for the presentation. There was a commitment and endurance displayed by the witnesses over the past 38 years, and I am sure they wondered on many days and nights if they would get anywhere with it. I am thankful they did.

I am old enough to remember the black and white pictures on television on that Sunday evening, seeing the priest with a white handkerchief and the attempts to bring injured innocent people to hospital. One could not help but sense that it was definite history in the making on that day, with 14 innocent people murdered. It took a long time to get justice for those people and history was made again on 15 June this year. One could not but be moved while watching and listening to the people who had lost relatives, friends and very close family saying their few words. One could see the tension being lifted from those people and it certainly made an impression on me that I will never forget. It is a mind-boggling issue.

British Prime Minister, David Cameron, made a genuine apology with no ambiguity; it was a very forthright apology, which we should recognise. Like other speakers, I would like to hear comments on where we go from here and what can we do at this stage to further the cause of the witnesses. Everybody in this committee would agree that we should do whatever we can at this time.

This is a very important day and probably the most important we have had under the current chairmanship. It is nice to see the Chairman back to full health and I thank God he got over his difficult days during the summer recess. I am a Senator living on the Ulster Border and have been in Derry many times; I probably played music in every parish in the county in my time and was there from 1966 up to when events began in 1969. I was taken on two occasions on the bridge and left there for three hours on one very wet Friday night. I do not know but I can imagine what the people went through.

I am honoured to be here as leader of Seanad Éireann today in the midst of the representatives from the Nationalist community, along with our colleagues from Donegal, in particular, the Chairman and the Vice Chairman. These people and their families have suffered so much to make that day and the following day, as mentioned by Mr. Durkan, possible.

We can all remember very many special days in our life. Most of us would remember where we were when President John F. Kennedy died but we also know where we were when Bishop Daly had his handkerchief in his hand on that day in 1972. We can all remember the day Bobby Sands died. On the island of Ireland we are all rejoicing today and celebrating what our forefathers would have loved to have been alive to witness. Most of us are here because we are born to tradition and into the generations that our forefathers fought hard and put their lives on the line for. It was to give us the opportunity and the experience we are witnessing today in this room under the current chairmanship.

We will do whatever we can or what has to be done. We will debate the Saville report in the Seanad. Senators Keaveney and Doherty are here beside me. We will discuss the matter in the autumn session and we are four-square behind the Chairman and this committee in supporting whatever the families and the representatives of the people of Ireland want in making outcomes even more successful than what we are here today to celebrate.

Ba mhaith liom fáilte a chur roimh na daoine gaolta atá anseo, John, Mickey, Tony agus Gerry. Tá mé iontach sásta fáilte a chur rompu. I was taken by the presentation and the selflessness of what family members have continuously said in statements over the past 38 years. I was able to be present at the Guildhall on 15 June for that momentous day.

The introductory comments from Tony set the context and acknowledged the grievance of all those who suffered as a result of the conflict, and for the other families still struggling for justice who have not yet received it. Each of the representatives came out, declared the name of a loved one — a brother, father or other relative — and shouted the word "innocent", and that will leave a lasting impact on me and others who were not born at the time of Bloody Sunday.

There is no doubt that it gripped the island of Ireland at the time and had a significant impact across the world. It also had a significant impact on generations not yet born. Before even getting involved in politics I remember leaving my house without my mother and father knowing and hitch-hiking to Derry in a 60-mile journey to take part in the Bloody Sunday parade. Hearing the story, I felt that I wanted to be involved with the families in a campaign for justice. Being there on 15 June meant the march which took place 38 years earlier could be completed.

On the walk from Free Derry Corner to the Guildhall we did not know if the crime would happen all over again and if the Saville report would tell the truth and put to bed the lies or if there would be some kind of fudge in the report. It was very tense. I say this as somebody who lived in a neighbouring county and was not born at the time. I failed to understand the emotions that families in the Guildhall would experience. They are a tribute and a shining light to those across the island of Ireland campaigning for justice and those across the world. They kept going for 38 years in the middle of grieving and dealing with emotions. The 28 families have been kept together, and continuing with that job of work has been fantastic. I pay tribute to these people.

I would like to see how we can go forward. There have been comments that there are outstanding issues. I agree the report is strong on innocence but weak in guilt and there are major issues in that respect. Perhaps the terms of reference did not allow this and it was what we could get at the time. There are outstanding issues. As an elected representative, I know my party has given a commitment to act to bring about the wishes of the families. I understand there may be differences between them, with some wanting prosecutions and others happy for the report to vindicate loved ones. Whatever the families require, there is an onus to support them.

Is there something which the witnesses propose for this committee to do on some of the outstanding issues? As a committee can we help to address those areas? Many people referred to the comments of the British Prime Minister, Mr. David Cameron. His comments on the Saville report were generous and are to be welcomed. However, I agree with Deputy Ó Caoláin that when we consider his speech in full we can see other parts that as an Irish republican one could not agree with.

I fear that because there has been so much focus — and rightly so — on what happened on the streets of Derry on 30 January 1972, with the publication of the Saville report and the apology by the Prime Minister, some people will close the book on the issue. We know that only five months earlier, on 9 August, the same parachute regiment killed 11 unarmed civilians on the streets of Belfast, yet there has been no justice in that case. Deputy Ó Caoláin mentioned the Dublin-Monaghan bombings and the fact that the truth about these incidents has never been discovered, nor has an apology been forthcoming. There is fear people might think that because the Bloody Sunday inquiry has been completed, the report published and an apology provided, the issues have been dealt with. The delegates, who are the families of the victims, have given inspiration to other groups and families to continue their fight for justice.

On that point, I formally endorse Deputy Ó Caoláin's proposal to make a last-ditch appeal to the Minister to provide funding for the Justice for the Forgotten group. This is important. The families of the victims of Bloody Sunday have acknowledged the contribution and support of many who have assisted them over their long campaign. Hindsight is a great thing, but perhaps if that small amount of support had not been there we would not be in the position in which we are today. It is important, in that context, that we are sincere about uncovering the truth. The State should continue to support that campaign and reinstate the funding that has been withdrawn.

I welcome the families and their statements. I acknowledge the raising of the unfortunate issue of Gerald Donaghey and his family, although "unfortunate" is the wrong word. The report does not cast any doubt over his innocence, but it is disappointing that certain comments are included in it.

As a substitute member of the committee I am delighted to be here today, and I join the other members in welcoming the delegation. I commend them on their 38 and a half years of fantastic work. If ever there was a case for endurance, doggedness and determination, theirs is it. Their delight at the vindication of the victims' innocence was something we all shared when the report was released on 15 June. Like other members, I found it satisfying to see a Tory Prime Minister use the word "Derry" and effectively apologise in the House of Commons, but I am sure the delegates and all their family members obtained greater satisfaction from this.

We all remember the television images of Bloody Sunday, and those of use who watch RTE's "Reeling in the Years" know the image of Bishop Daly — or Father Daly as he was then — carrying the white handkerchief. It is set in my memory, and, I am sure, the memory of everyone else. I wish the delegates well for the future and I wish the committee well in its endeavours. I congratulate the delegates on their achievement. They have certainly provided a blueprint for any group that is fighting for something — in this case, justice and the vindication of their family members.

The delegates have heard many comments from our elected colleagues. I will leave it to them to respond as they see fit. All are welcome to speak.

Mr. Tony Doherty

Quite an amount was said. I am conscious of the stage we have reached. I am also conscious of the elevated status of our group and of Bloody Sunday as compared to a number of other groups and issues — in fact, practically everything else related to the conflict. I am uncomfortable with that, but it is the case nonetheless. We have been united and struggling for quite a while.

The unique aspect of Bloody Sunday, as we must keep reminding ourselves, is that it happened in broad daylight with thousands of witnesses. Also, it was caused by the State, and there was then a conspiracy to prevent the truth from coming out. That makes it unique, and that is why our position has been elevated. It is also why we have had to be so dogged over the years in pursuing our case for the truth to be established and for justice to be achieved.

There are several key issues with regard to dealing with the past, remembering the past and trying to work out how to highlight truth and justice for everybody. We do not have a magic wand; we are experts in our own field, but we are not experts in anybody else's. Part of the difficulty is that the conflict endured over three decades, and its resolution will probably take longer than that — not just in political terms but in terms of human rights and in acknowledging and dealing with all that happened throughout. This is a difficult area because for one person justice may mean a particular thing, while for another it may mean something completely different.

One thing we all agree on is the need for truth and for mechanisms through which the truth can be drawn out. The mechanism of the public inquiry, which we and others helped bring about — in our case, in 1998 — is probably imperfect because it places too much power in the hands of too few and is a formal, judicial approach to fact-finding. To a large extent it does not deal with people's hurt and emotions in the way another mechanism might. For example, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa was about establishing truth, but it also tried to bring about reconciliation, which is often forgotten. It is usually referred to as the Truth Commission rather than the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. It is a difficult concept.

Our group is on record as saying we would be quite happy to transfer whatever expertise we have in our field to other groups; we have done so in the past. We met the families of the victims of the Ballymurphy massacre, the Dublin-Monaghan bombings and so on. However, it is a difficult subject — in fact, practically intractable. I forecast that whenever we decide the conflict is finally over and all the issues resolved, there will still be people who are saying "What about me?". As I said, for some people justice means one thing, while for others it means something else. I hope that does not come across as too abstract.

A number of the speakers made points and asked questions about unfinished business. There are aspects of the business that remain unfinished. In direct response to what Mr. Pat Doherty said about the perjury issue, that is clearly within the remit of the PPS or the CPS, none of us is too sure. Our lawyers are trying to work out at what point it is best to have this dealt with. The evidence, in terms of perjury, is reflected throughout the report. Lord Saville has several phrases to contextualise a particular killing or the behaviour or the demeanour of the person who was involved in the killing and their demeanour at the inquiry itself. He states quite unequivocally that soldiers gave wholly untruthful accounts to the Saville Inquiry. That is a phrase that is repeated with regard to quite a number of the soldiers, and certain police officers as well. This committee needs to reflect on that. That is not an historical crime, it is a modern crime. Where servants of the state or those who are still in the employ of or pensioned by the state lied and covered over their own acts, that needs to be pursued with the full rigour of the law. At the end of the day this is an issue of equality. We have always said we wished to be treated with equality before the law. If we had been treated with equality before the law, quite a lot of the conflict that happened since 1972 may not have happened at all. That is stated by Lord Saville in the final paragraph of his report. Those are the key issues.

In regard to what Deputy Ó Caoláin said in the context of the Saville report and Prime Minister David Cameron's acceptance of it. I would not have written Prime Minister David Cameron's statement and I will probably never write a statement for him, but there are parts of it I could have written where he describes the unjustified and unjustifiable nature of the killings on Bloody Sunday. In fairness that is what people will probably remember.

The history of the British army's role in the North tells a different story from that presented by Prime Minister David Cameron in the House of Commons. In the main body of his report, Lord Saville reflected briefly on the probable patterns of killings and conspiracies of silence and so on from practically 1970 right through to the end of the conflict, but he saw it as outside of his remit to either investigate or make conclusions on that issue.

The other aspect of unfinished business is the honours that were bestowed on soldiers as a direct consequence of their involvement on Bloody Sunday, the most infamous of all being Colonel Wilford himself. He was in control of forces in the Bogside that day and was described by Lord Saville as effectively having countermanded his orders not to go into the Bogside. He was decorated a number of months later. That is an issue for this committee and it will be an issue, I am sure, in Westminster in October when the report is tabled for debate. It should be an issue as well when the report is tabled for debate in the Northern Assembly. From my point of view, those are the critical issues. There are probably other issues and points I have not covered but I am sure Mr. John Kelly, Mr. Gerry Duddy and Mr. Mickey McKinney will be happy to do that to some extent.

Mr. John Kelly

I listened to all the questions. When one thinks about them, they put in context what will happen in the future. We were in the Guildhall on the day and listened to David Cameron's speech which was gracious and brave. The policy meant nothing to me. What mattered to me was the acknowledgment of wrongdoing. That is the way I have looked at it ever since. He, through his Government, has admitted that all those people were murdered on Bloody Sunday. I was talking to somebody yesterday who said that by right Prime Minister David Cameron should prosecute the soldiers because the Government is the employer of the soldiers. I do not apologise for saying that I want the soldiers prosecuted for murder and attempted murder. The reason I say that is that my brother, Michael, was murdered by soldier F who also murdered Mr. Mickey McKinney's brother, Mr. Tony Doherty's father and Barney McGuigan.

That guy was a multi-killer on Bloody Sunday and was also responsible for the injury of four others. I could ignore that and say that soldier should not go to jail because he is over 60 years of age and should not be prosecuted. I do not see it that way because it boils down to natural justice and due process. The evidence is there for the prosecution of all these soldiers. That is my view. My family feel the same way. Even when my mother was alive she said the same, namely, that soldier F should be prosecuted for the murder of her son. In reality what they did on Bloody Sunday did not stop there because the fall-out from Bloody Sunday was around us.

Many young people joined the IRA and the paramilitaries and went to jail and died because of Bloody Sunday. Many people on both sides went to jail and died because of Bloody Sunday right across the spectrum. They carry not only the blood of the victims that day but the blood of many others. For my satisfaction and that of my family and perhaps the satisfaction of many other families, these guys should be brought to justice for what they did. They are responsible for most of the Troubles. Many people have said to me that only for Bloody Sunday, they do not believe the Troubles would have lasted for so long. That is my view.

I cannot decide the future. The future lies in the hands of the CPS, the Crown Prosecution Service, and the PPS, the Public Prosecution Service. The PPS is located in the North and the CPS in London. Is that correct?

Mr. Mark Durkan, MLA, MP

Yes.

Mr. John Kelly

Therefore, it comes under two jurisdictions. We know that both are looking at this report at this time and that the Chief Constable of the PSNI, Mr. Matt Baggott, is involved in scrutinising the report with a view to prosecutions. To be truthful, I hope they will decide to prosecute.

Mr. Gerry Duddy

I will be short and sweet. I agree very much with what Mr. Tony Doherty has said about the work we still have to finish. The Duddy family agrees with Mr. John Kelly that it would like to see prosecutions if that is possible. Given that we have come this far in our quest for the truth we have to take that last step. We would do our loved ones no favour by not going the full distance.

I feel embarrassed at times when people talk about the price of the inquiry while other groups who are seeking the same as us for a lifetime say they will never get the same type of inquiry as the Bloody Sunday families. My answer is that we worked hard for 38 years to get this inquiry. I and the others who campaigned, have no right to say we are entitled to campaign and that other groups are not. Everybody who lost somebody during the Troubles for whatever reason from whatever side is entitled to the truth. I will support any group or individual, and I hope they get the support.

I do not know the way forward, but we were always willing to help groups or individuals in the past and we are willing to do so in the future.

Mr. Mickey McKinney

On the night of Bloody Sunday our parents were numb, our community was numb and a lie was put out. Things happened in Northern Ireland at that time and British soldiers thought they could kill people with impunity because they were Catholic Nationalists. They did that for a long time.

We met Mr. Owen Paterson on 15 June and I asked him if he, his Government and our Government will learn anything from this event. If they have learned anything I hope they have learned that when one puts on a uniform or when one works on behalf of the Government, one is not above the law. For me, and I am sure for the rest of us here, that is another part of the fight for justice, in that governments cannot be seen to be above the law.

I sincerely thank each one of the delegates for attending and for the generosity, dignity and respect they have shown in their contributions. The events of Bloody Sunday in 1972 shocked all of the people across the island of Ireland, and overseas. I remember them well. I was a young, impressionable, enthusiastic teenager and that day will live with me forever. It was a watershed in the history of this island, and 15 June this year was a watershed in modern political history in terms of the relationships between the two islands of Ireland and the United Kingdom as a result of the generosity of Mr. Cameron's response to the Saville report.

The Saville report acknowledges the significant social, political and security impact Bloody Sunday had. Today we heard something of the impact it had at an individual level for all of the relatives of those lost and injured. We are very grateful to all our guests for their time and for sharing their views with us on behalf of all of the families.

The Widgery report and its sham findings meant that the events of Bloody Sunday led not only to repeated accusations, which speakers alluded to earlier, against those involved in the killings on that terrible date but also to an indictment of a system and an establishment which was then unwilling to recognise the truth about what happened on that terrible day. The Saville report sheds light on one of the most resonant events of the Troubles. Many other difficult legacy issues remain.

I take this opportunity to recognise the families of the Bloody Sunday victims for their brave, unfaltering and steadfast campaign. If world conflicts ever need an example and a symbol of humane resilience, dignity and solidarity, they need look no further than to the families of the victims of the events on Bloody Sunday in Derry in 1972.

On behalf of this committee I express our deepest gratitude to the delegates and, through them, to each member of all the families for their dedicated, dignified and resilient 38 years of effort to bring about a final result to vindicate the unfortunate victims of that terrible day.

I also inform them that the Saville inquiry has been included, as an item for debate, on the agenda of the next British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly plenary conference which will take place in the Isle of Man next November. Many of this committee's members are also members of that assembly and the delegates' presentation will also be useful to members participating in that discussion, which will be co-chaired by our colleague, Deputy Niall Blaney.

The Saville report is also listed for discussion at the annual meeting of the British-Irish Association taking place in Oxford tomorrow, which I will attend on behalf of this joint committee along with Deputy Seymour Crawford. I will be able to bring first-hand responses and evidence from the delegates to that meeting tomorrow, which I look forward to attending.

A number of issues have been raised here, and the delegates have raised many issues. I am aware that they are due to meet the Minister for Foreign Affairs at 3 p.m. We must have lunch in the meantime and, therefore, we will rapidly move forward to that. I suggest that the number of issues the delegates have should be raised with the Minister. We will consider the requests they have made to the committee. We will complete a detailed appraisal of what the delegates have said, what our colleagues have said and what the delegates require and, based on that, we will proceed to assist in whatever way we can to bring finality to this terribly sad, traumatic situation in the lives and history of all the delegates' families.

Several requests have been made. Deputy Blaney suggested that we meet Mr. Paterson. We will request such a meeting. We are mindful of his responsibility to his committee in the House of Commons. We expect that his first duty will be to respond in that forum and thereafter we hope he will come here to talk to us.

Deputy Ó Caoláin referred to the lack of resources to continue the inquiry into the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. As Chairman, I am prepared to make a further written request to my colleague, the Minister for Justice and Law Reform, Deputy Ahern, asking him to reconsider that position. I will speak to him about it.

We are deeply grateful to the delegates and we will stand in solidarity with them to bring this matter to a full and absolute conclusion to the best of our political ability. I speak for all of my colleagues, North and South, on this island who have played key individual and collective roles working on their behalf over many years.

On that note, if there is no further business——

When the Chairman writes to the Minister for Justice and Law Reform on the Dublin-Monaghan bombings issue I ask that he seek an update on the status of the inquiry into the Omagh bombing, although I do not want to link the two atrocities.

We will certainly include that. We will conclude now. I ask everybody to go to lunch immediately because we are running a little late. We hope to have another meeting towards the end of September if possible but I will adjourn the meeting sine die.

The joint committee adjourned at 1.30 p.m. sine die.
Barr
Roinn