Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery
Debate between Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard and Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent
Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard
To ask His Majesty’s Government whether they plan to reform the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery to strengthen its independence, powers and accountability.
Baroness in Waiting/Government Whip (Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent)
My Lords, the Government are committed to building the confidence of victims and families in the work of the commission and to making timely progress so that they can obtain the information, accountability and acknowledgement that they have long sought. To do this, the Government are engaging with all parties to help determine what provisions should be included in primary legislation to reform the commission, as outlined in the Secretary of State’s Statement to the Commons on 4 December 2024, which I repeated to this House.
Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard (UUP)
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that answer. We are aware that 90% of the killings that took place during what are known as the Troubles in Northern Ireland were caused by terrorists, many of whom emanated from the Republic of Ireland. What are the Minister and the Government doing to try to engage with the Republic of Ireland? As we have heard from both the former Director of Public Prosecutions and the former Lord Chief Justice in Northern Ireland, the Republic of Ireland’s proposals for dealing with those killings that emanated from that country have been very weak. Will the Minister also give an undertaking that no former security force members who served in Northern Ireland will be excluded from serving as investigators in the ICRIR?
Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent (Lab)
I thank the noble Lord for his question, and for his service with the UDR in Northern Ireland and as a politician. With regard to our engagement with the Government of Ireland, as co-guarantors of the Belfast/Good Friday agreement, we are working closely with the current and incoming Governments of Ireland to ensure that their role in dealing with legacy cases is recognised. We are looking to engage with them as key stakeholders as part of our new plans for legacy, which, as the noble Lord knows are in development. He will be aware that there are currently no prohibitions on investigators for ICRIR and I would not expect there to be any.
Northern Ireland: Legacy of the Troubles
Debate between Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard and Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent
Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent (Lab)
I thank my noble friend both for his question and for his generous mentoring of me since we came into government. I am in awe of the work he did when he was Secretary of State and I am very grateful for how generous he has been with his time. He knows better than I quite how difficult and challenging it can be to secure consensus on matters pertaining to Northern Ireland—there is nothing more emotive than the issues we are discussing. But we will have proper engagement with all political parties to try to build a way forward. We are very clear that one reason why the current legacy Act has failed to receive cross-community support—and failed to secure the trust of communities in Northern Ireland and of the victims and survivors—is that none of the political parties was in agreement. Although these conversations will be very challenging, I look forward to working with noble Lords across this House to try to build a level of consensus, as the Secretary of State promised in the other place yesterday.
Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard (UUP)
My Lords, some things in life are very difficult to get a conclusion to. Some things are even difficult to get agreement on, and legacy in Northern Ireland is certainly one of them. If the noble Baroness listened to Radio Ulster this morning, she will know that, although she has brought forward some new proposals—which I welcome, and the Government have—they are just a little less undesirable than the ones that were there before. That is not coming from this House, because I hear much more welcome here—but, if noble Lords listened to the radio this morning, they would know that it is much different.
I am hugely frustrated, particularly given that the Government were only just in place when they announced a public inquiry into the Pat Finucane murder, when we have hundreds and thousands of innocent victims in Northern Ireland without that opportunity. I declare an interest: I served in the security forces in Northern Ireland for 18 years and saw some of those people murdered. I visited and continue to visit their families. They say to me—for example, the victims of the Enniskillen bomb—“Where is the public inquiry? Where is the equality for me?” There is none. Until the noble Baroness and her Government get some equality into dealing with the legacy and the victims in Northern Ireland, there will never be agreement or support for that process.
Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent (Lab)
I will take this opportunity to thank the noble Lord for his service. I can only imagine the things he saw when he served. The support that he and all colleagues in Northern Ireland, as dedicated public servants, have provided to families who were touched by the Troubles, as many of them have been, shows a level of public service that very few of the rest of us have ever had to experience. It puts them in a class above and we are grateful for everything that they have done to support people.
On what was on the radio this morning, it will not surprise noble Lords to hear that I have been taking a particular interest in the media of Northern Ireland for a while—but definitely in the last 24 hours, to see the response. As was said, everything to do with legacy is so emotive that it becomes very challenging. Nothing is more complex than next steps, but our response is to make sure that we engage as broadly as possible with all members of the community.
On the Finucane public inquiry, delivering a public inquiry was a solemn commitment made by the last Labour Government, which is why we have fulfilled our commitment. We did that post the Good Friday agreement, and it does not suggest that other arrangements cannot and will not provide a level of closure and information for noble Lords. That is why we want to strengthen ICRIR for the families.
Northern Ireland
Debate between Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard and Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent(1 month, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text
Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent (Lab)
My Lords, I have the full list of where we have delivered, where we are in progress and where we are tied to EU reset and business readiness; I will speak to colleagues about making that publicly available. With regard to the all-Ireland economy, the Government are committed to protecting the UK-Ireland internal market and the Windsor Framework, including all aspects of the Northern Ireland economy. Section 10(1)(b) refers to the joint report between the UK and EU negotiators of October 2017, which refers—among other things—to the all-Ireland economy. The all-Ireland economy is a fact and is greatly to the benefit of the businesses and people of Northern Ireland, as is Northern Ireland’s trade with the UK internal market.
Lord Elliott of Ballinamallard (UUP)
My Lords, we have had the Northern Ireland protocol and the Windsor Framework, and now we have the Safeguarding the Union document. All of those are supposed to assist with trade between Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but we still have border checks, a border in the Irish Sea and no resolution to the veterinary medicines issue. When will the Government resolve these difficult issues for Northern Ireland?
Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent (Lab)
This is a priority for this Government and we will work at pace, especially on the veterinary medicines issue. We have established a working group, which continues to advise the Government and which met again earlier this month.