Manchester Terrorism Attack
Jim Shannon Excerpts(2 days, 9 hours ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Shabana Mahmood
I agree with my hon. Friend; those comments are despicable and utterly unacceptable. It is why I am reviewing the wider legislative framework in relation to protest and hate crime.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I give my condolences to those who lost their lives as a result of the Manchester synagogue attack and to those who suffered the trauma of the loss of a family member. I thank the Home Secretary for her strong and emphatic statement. She speaks for everyone in this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland with her words of strong condemnation. I was sickened and shocked to hear of the attack in Manchester on Yom Kippur and the loss of life that ensued. It is an established fact that antisemitism in the UK is once again on the rise, to such an extent that there are security details at all religious events.
I can well remember after the Darkley hall massacre that many, probably all, churches across Northern Ireland had extra security details on their doors. Those dark days are behind us in Northern Ireland, but they are not behind our Jewish friends, and we have witnessed that in recent times. They require actions, not words, and above all honesty about the threat level against them. Just how will the Home Secretary provide assurances to the Jewish community that are not just media soundbites but promises of safety that can be trusted?
Shabana Mahmood
I assure the hon. Member and the House that the Government will take action—we have already taken action, and there will be more to come. I know that will be debated in the House over the coming weeks and months, but this is not a moment for warm words; it is a moment for strong action, and that is what the Government will deliver.
Police: Professional Standards
Jim Shannon Excerpts(4 weeks, 1 day ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Ben Maguire
I completely agree that it is essential we have police officers with the experience, skills and knowledge, to ensure that people have proper trust and confidence in our police and confidence that complaints will be dealt with properly.
Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)
Mr Shannon, I was beginning to get a little bit anxious, but finally you are on your feet.
Jim Shannon
I was holding my breath on this one. I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing the debate. He has given three examples of things that have happened. Does he agree that in a world of grey, it is imperative that the conduct and professionalism of our police forces is black and white and that officers understand that once they put the application form in, their conduct must be of the highest standards, and this will be enforced at the highest level?
Ben Maguire
I completely agree we must hold our police officer to the highest standards, particularly when it comes to complaints. If those standards do not meet the threshold that we all rightly expect, we need to have a robust complaints system, in which we can have proper trust and confidence.
I will quickly mention one more constituent case—that of another teenage girl, who was sexually assaulted by a close neighbour and has had to move away from the family home while the investigation continues for months and months, without any updates at all from the police. I am afraid that the list goes on.
I am sure that other Members will agree that one of the greatest privileges of being a Member in this place is meeting some really inspiring constituents. The bravery of those young girls, and Lisa’s relentless campaigning on behalf of her son, have inspired me. I am proud to bring their cases before this House.
To conclude, I ask the Minister to please clarify some of the following questions. What can my constituents do when they have legitimate concerns that have not been properly addressed by the complaints process? Clearly, a judicial review is completely out of reach for most of our constituents.
Oral Answers to Questions
Jim Shannon Excerpts(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dan Jarvis
I am grateful to the hon. Member. Herbie’s law is a proposed legislative framework to phase out animal experiments, specifically in medical research, in the UK by 2035. The Government’s commitment is clear: we will partner with scientists, industry and civil society to work towards a long-term goal of phasing out the use of animals in scientific research and testing. I will ensure that he receives a letter from the relevant Minister.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for his answer. It is quite clear that people have had their lives saved through scientific experiments with animals, and we thank the scientists for that. At the same time, a growing number of people have grave concerns, including my constituents and probably the Minister’s constituents as well. Can he assure us that when it comes to doing animal experiments of any sort, the priority will always be the people who can be saved as a result of the experiments, but it will also be the care of the animals? That is what my people want, and I think it is what everybody wants.
Dan Jarvis
I can give the hon. Gentleman that assurance. The Government authorise the use of animals in science under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 in order to support critical national objectives in public health, scientific innovation and environmental protection. The authorisations provided by the regulator are not a blanket approval, but a tightly regulated process that has rigorous and robust ethical, legal and scientific scrutiny.
Palestine Action: Proscription and Protests
Jim Shannon Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Dan Jarvis
The hon. Gentleman will have heard the response I gave earlier to questions on that specific point. I would gently say to him that 17 police officers were assaulted over the weekend, and, while I completely understand why people want to refer to non-violent protest, and I completely accept that the majority of people were behaving in a non-violent way, I hope that he and others will join with me in absolutely condemning any attack on the police that took place over the weekend.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for all his answers. I was and am pleased to see steps to ensure that protesters who were outside the realms of peaceful protest and demonstrating support for a proscribed organisation were dealt with in terms that line up with the law. Palestine Action’s illegal street protests are impacting the police’s ability to do their normal job. Does the Minister believe there are enough police officers to deal with more of these scenarios, and how will the Government ensure that policing on the ground in communities is not sacrificed in order to police these protests?
Dan Jarvis
The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. I can give him an absolute assurance that we work very closely with the police to ensure that they have the resources they need and the necessary legislative framework in order to do their difficult job. As he will understand from his own part of the world, it is important that the police are able to enforce the law without fear or favour. It is worth pointing out that the police work closely with organisers each week to facilitate safe, lawful protests, and I know that they will continue to do so. Hundreds of thousands of people have been able to make their voices heard, while only a very tiny minority have been arrested for breaking the law.
Omar al-Bayoumi: Arrest and Extradition
Jim Shannon Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Dan Jarvis
On the right hon. Member’s final point, I refer him to the response I gave to his right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) a moment ago, but I agree about the importance of this matter. That day will be engrained in the minds of us all; I certainly remember exactly where I was. The world changed, and my life changed alongside it. I absolutely share his concern about these matters, and I completely agree with his point about the responsibility we have for the UK victims of that horrendous terrorist attack. I give him an assurance of the seriousness with which we take these matters.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister for his update and his answers. Does he not agree that our obligation to expose international terrorism and support our allies in the fight against those responsible for the 9/11 bombings is incredibly clear? Every step must be taken to ensure that anyone on British soil understands that we will never be a shield for terrorists. How will he ensure that every possible step is taken to make sure that this man is questioned—and held to account if, in fact, he is guilty?
Dan Jarvis
I am grateful to the hon. Member, as I always am, not least because he speaks with great authority on matters relating to terrorism. I have had the privilege of discussing it with him on many occasions. He raises important points. I can only reiterate the importance that this Government attach to keeping the public safe and working with our international allies to defeat international terrorism. This Government will do everything that we need to do to stand against the terrorists and with those affected by their destructive activities.
Violence against Women and Girls: Pornography Prostitution
Jim Shannon Excerpts(1 month, 1 week ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Joani Reid (East Kilbride and Strathaven) (Lab)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the impact of pornography prostitution on violence against women and girls.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. I begin by thanking two organisations that have been hugely helpful in preparing for today’s debate: UK Feminista, which provides the secretariat for the all-party parliamentary group on commercial sexual exploitation, and the Centre to End All Sexual Exploitation—CEASE—and particularly Gemma Kelly, its head of policy.
Let me set out from the beginning precisely what I mean by pornography prostitution. It is the fusion of the pornography industry and the sex trade into one system. It is the buying, selling and consumption of sexual access to women, livestreamed, or filmed and uploaded, and monetised as entertainment. It is seen by many as a new and booming industry. I disagree: it is commercialised abuse, repackaged and sold as entertainment. It is a form of violence against women and girls.
Nowhere is that clearer than on OnlyFans, a UK-based company that has now become the global giant of online sexual exploitation. Last year, it generated $6.6 billion in revenue. It markets itself as a harmless subscription platform but, in reality, it is the largest pimping empire in the world today. I want to focus on three areas where OnlyFans is enabling violence against women and girls.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
First of all, I commend the hon. Lady on bringing this forward. I spoke to her beforehand to ensure that my thoughts are similar to hers. There is no doubt that online platforms such as OnlyFans pose a potential threat to how young people perceive sexual relations. Does the hon. Lady agree—the Minister is here to answer this, of course—that the law needs to be brought up to date to ensure that OnlyFans and all other online pornographic platforms, including adult services websites, put proper age and consent checks in place to protect young people from damaging content online?
Joani Reid
I agree. I think that age verification is hugely important in tackling children’s exposure to pornography. It is not just on those websites; it is found on mainstream websites as well, and I think that is something that we need to look at in the next regulations under the Online Safety Act 2023.
As I said, OnlyFans is the largest pimping empire in the world. It is a playground for child sexual abuse and exploitation. Harm and coercion are suffered by women who become so-called content creators, and there is a wider societal and cultural impact, particularly on children and young people.
I begin with the most damning evidence: OnlyFans claims to have a zero-tolerance approach to child abuse, yet Reuters has documented at least 30 criminal cases between 2019 and 2024 in the United States alone involving child sexual abuse material on the platform, including hundreds of videos and images, some depicting extreme abuse. In one horrific case, the graphic abuse of a 16-year-old girl was monetised for more than a year before it was taken down, and that was only after Reuters started asking questions. We should be under no illusion: OnlyFans is not a safe platform for consenting adults to express and enjoy themselves. As one survivor put it,
“A whole company has made money off of my biggest trauma”.
The truth is that all that is just the tip of the iceberg, because OnlyFans hides content behind millions of individual paywalls, and there is no meaningful way for independent investigators, charities, or even law enforcement to monitor the full scale of the abuse. That is not transparency; it is secrecy by design.
Ofcom fined OnlyFans for providing misleading information about age verification. While the company claims to set a global standard, the reality is stark. It has no meaningful age verification in the vast majority of the more than 100 countries in which it operates. How many of the 500,000 new users signing up every day are children? We do not know because OnlyFans will not say. OnlyFans likes to boast that every video is reviewed by a human moderator, but the figures just do not add up. Last month alone, 62 million pieces of content were uploaded. Independent experts have said that it would take tens of thousands of moderators to review it all, but OnlyFans employs just a few dozen staff. It outsources the rest to Poland and Ukraine, behind non-disclosure agreements, with no transparency. When the company tells us it has zero tolerance for abuse, we must ask: zero tolerance or zero credibility? The evidence suggests the latter. It is not a British success story; it is the British export of the abuse of children to the world.
The second reality is that OnlyFans is not the empowering feminist fairytale that its marketing suggests. It claims to give women financial freedom, but the facts tell another story: 73% of the profits go to the top 10% of creators, and the average woman makes just £4 a month. That is not liberation; it is a lottery in which a handful at the top get rich and millions of others are driven to push their boundaries further and further to survive. As one former content creator described it,
“I wasn’t there. I was doing things like a robot.”
Another said,
“When you’re making an OnlyFans, you are gambling…Betting that your clients are strangers who don’t cross into your real world.”
She said it was the worst thing that ever happened to her when she discovered that the man who had paid her over $10,000 over a two-year period for her explicit videos was not a stranger but her uncle.
Research by Talita, an organisation in Sweden that supports women out of prostitution, pornography and trafficking, found that almost all women drawn into online pornography had suffered childhood trauma: 96% reported abuse, 88% sexual abuse, and 79% physical abuse. Predators deliberately target vulnerability. Women do not wake up one day just wanting to make porn. As one survivor put it,
“At first I told myself, I’ll just sell a foot photo. And before you know it, you’re drawn in step by step.”
Borders and Asylum
Jim Shannon Excerpts(1 month, 2 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Yvette Cooper
The Conservative party in government managed to create chaos in the asylum system and let criminal gangs take over along our borders while illegal migration quadrupled in the space of just four years. Immigration has always been an important part of our history, and that is why it needs to be properly controlled and managed in a fair and sensible way, which has not happened too often in the past. It needs to be serious and respectful to other people, to make sure that we as a country come together at the same time as making sure there are proper controls in the system.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Home Secretary for her statement. Does she accept that the frustration many feel about illegal immigration must never be confused with opinions about those who come and add to our society in the NHS, in agriculture and in many other jobs where we rely on help from foreign nationals? Does the Home Secretary not accept that the route to the UK from the Republic of Ireland through Northern Ireland is feeding that frenzy? Will she finally rightfully close the current loopholes and block the back-door access to the United Kingdom from the Republic of Ireland?
Yvette Cooper
The hon. Gentleman is right that people have long supported those coming to work in our NHS through legal routes. Those routes have to be controlled and managed, however, and migration quadrupling under the previous Government was a serious problem. That is why we are bringing legal migration down; that is why we put that in the immigration White Paper. The hon. Gentleman is also right that some of the most serious concerns are about dangerous and illegal boat crossings that are underpinned and facilitated by criminal gangs. He raises a separate issue about Ireland and Northern Ireland, but he will know that the common travel area is a long-standing part of our history and arrangements. We have close security co-operation with the Irish Government and Irish law enforcement for exactly that reason, and it is an important part of the arrangements and the close relationship between our countries.
Orgreave Inquiry
Jim Shannon Excerpts(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dame Diana Johnson
First, I will deal with this issue around documents. The Home Secretary recently wrote to all police forces in England and Wales and all Government Departments to remind them of the relevant legislative frameworks for records management and to ask that information relating to the events at Orgreave on 18 June 1984 be retained. The Home Secretary has asked, if any documents have been destroyed, what those documents were and why they were destroyed. It is also worth reminding the House that under section 35 of the Inquiries Act 2005, it is a criminal offence to destroy or conceal information relevant to a public inquiry.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister very much for her statement, and for her carefully chosen words on a contentious issue. I ask her this question gently from experience. Does she appreciate that, similar to the prosecution of veterans and service personnel in Northern Ireland, asking a retired officer why he made a split-second decision 40 years ago, what was happening in detail when he made that decision and the exact wording of directions given to him is and can be incredibly distressing and upsetting? Those officers are now in their 80s or perhaps even their 90s. What support can the Minister offer them to enable them to cope with the re-traumatisation that they will undoubtedly suffer?
Dame Diana Johnson
That is an important point. This is not the first time a Minister has had to stand here and agree to an inquiry into events that happened a long time ago. The hon. Gentleman and I have worked together on the infected blood inquiry, so he will know that it took a long time to arrive at that point. I fully recognise that the length of time involved means some people, sadly, will have died, while others will be very elderly and having to recall what happened. This is not how we would want it to be, is it? As for the hon. Gentleman’s point about those who will be called to give testimony to the inquiry, I know that the bishop will be considering what support should be provided to help the witnesses, whether they are police officers or picketers and their families, and I am sure that that will be uppermost in his mind.
Asylum Hotels: Migrant Criminal Activity
Jim Shannon Excerpts(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Dame Diana Johnson
Clearly that is a live matter before the courts, but I want people to be held to account for their actions. If that involves extradition, that is the right thing to do.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
As always, I thank the Minister for her answers. However, all too often we seem to be hearing about criminal activity by immigrants and asylum seekers across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and more needs to be done to address it. On behalf of my constituents, who ask me this question all the time—every weekend, to be precise—what steps will the Minister take to ensure that we have a zero-tolerance policy for migrants awaiting an asylum decision, so that if they are detained for any kind of criminal activity during that time, they will be sent back to their country of origin as a matter of urgency?
Dame Diana Johnson
As I said at the outset, whoever perpetrates a crime will be held to account, and there will be consequences. I hope I have been clear that that includes people who are making asylum applications, as well as the wider general public. People have to be held to account.
Victims of Terrorism: State Support
Jim Shannon Excerpts(3 months ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
It is a real pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris, and I say a special thank you to the hon. Member for Rossendale and Darwen (Andy MacNae) for bringing this motion forward. He and I talked beforehand, and it is very clear what he wants to achieve—indeed, it is the same reason why we are all here; we want to achieve it as well. As others have said, we have commemorated this week the anniversary of the London bombings. What a timely debate this is. The hon. Member for Beckenham and Penge (Liam Conlon) told the story of what happened to his constituent and his constituent’s friend. Although I was not in London at that time, I remember vividly the killings, the murders, and the victims and the destruction that took place. It is a timely debate to remember those who suffer the impact long after the headlines change.
I declare an interest as someone who has known the devastation of loss due to terrorism. I represent Northern Ireland—that is no secret; the accent gives it away, although to be fair to the hon. Gentleman who spoke before me, his accent would be perhaps similar through his family connections. The reason I am making this speech here is the murder of my cousin Kenneth Smyth on 10 December 1971. He was a sergeant—
Richard Foord (Honiton and Sidmouth) (LD)
I am grateful to the hon. Member for giving way; I understand why he might need to take a moment to compose himself. This debate is an opportunity for those of us whose friends and family have served in the armed forces or security organisations and lost their lives to pay tribute to them. Although today is about the victims of terrorism, we also think about those who run towards danger and face down terrorism where victims cannot.
Jim Shannon
I thank the hon. Member for that. Yes—it is very real for us. I think of my cousin, 54 years ago, and even today, 54 years later, it is still as real for my family and myself. It is something that I do not think I will ever forget. Those here in the Public Gallery today will know the same agony, pain and suffering that we have. We suffer every day because of it. My pain is no more than anybody else’s—definitely not.
I think of those who carry on the fight; I think of my cousin, Shelley, who will always push for justice for the murder of her brother. They say that time heals all things, but I believe that the heart retains a special memory, and that that will never dim for so many people. I commend my cousin Shelley for all that she does, and all the others in Fermanagh and South Tyrone, and across the whole of Northern Ireland for what they do.
Liam Conlon
The hon. Gentleman is the Member of Parliament for a lot of my family, as he alluded to. They will be incredibly proud of him speaking up on this issue. I had the pleasure of visiting the WAVE Trauma Centre in Belfast, which the hon. Gentleman will know very well. It does fantastic work with survivors. In Northern Ireland, in response to the troubles, which were a 30-year conflict, people experience intergenerational trauma. The trauma is passed down, which is why we see one of the highest suicide rates in western Europe in Northern Ireland—I think it still has the highest suicide rate in western Europe. Sharing those stories is powerful and is a point of hope for so many people. My family and friends in Strangford are very fortunate to have an MP who speaks up on these issues so well.
Jim Shannon
I thank the hon. Gentleman, my friend and colleague, for that intervention, and I apologise, Mrs Harris.
Jim Shannon
I will mention others who are very important to me. As the leader of my party, my right hon. Friend the Member for Belfast East (Gavin Robinson), said in a recent debate on the European Remembrance Day for Victims of Terrorism, Northern Ireland has endured the brutality of terrorism for decades, and the legacy of so many atrocities remains in many hearts and homes to this day, right across all of Northern Ireland—not just in Strangford, which the hon. Member for Beckenham and Penge referred to and which I have the joy, honour and privilege to represent.
I think of the families of the Kingsmill massacre, where 10 Protestant workmen were slaughtered. It is as real today as if it had happened just yesterday. They still await justice. When I think of state support for the victims of terrorism, I think of accountability in the process of justice. I think of those who, to this day, hold on to the candle-like figure of justice that might just come their way, so that the person who murdered someone will be accountable. I say to the hon. Gentleman that, with fairness, it is not just about the support given; it is also about justice and responsibility. It is about feeling that the state—my country, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland—has been able to satisfy our quest for justice, so that those who carry out the crimes are accountable.
I think of La Mon in my constituency. They were having one of their dinners for the Irish Collie Club. Someone planted a bomb—there was a massive inferno of fire—and basically burned them alive. Accountability? Nobody has been held accountable for that—but they should be. I think of the Enniskillen bombing. People were attending a Remembrance Day service; again, the IRA put a bomb there among men, women and children and just killed whoever was close to it.
I think of the Darkley Hall massacre—people were worshipping God. I think of the Tullyvallen Orange Hall, where Orangemen were killed just because they were Orangemen. I think of the four Ulster Defence Regiment men murdered at Ballydugan; I knew three of those men personally, and I often think of them—indeed, I think of them nearly all the time. No justice—no one made accountable; but there needs to be. That is what we want to see. That is what I want to see. My heart burns for justice for all those people who have lost loved ones over the years—for those families.
The inquiry into the Omagh bomb is currently sitting. Today, I was pleased to hear that Mr Speaker—and I am sure others also caught it in the Chamber—has agreed to what the hon. Member for Gower (Tonia Antoniazzi) asked for last night. He has agreed to the disclosure of the information that is relevant to the Omagh bomb, so we are going to have that on Monday, I understand. I do not know it yet, but that may give accountability and responsibility for those who carried it out.
Yet the pursuit of truth is too often obstructed, whether by the police ombudsman’s office or through political calculation, as displayed by the Irish Government’s ongoing stymieing of the truth of their role in our past. I think of Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Bob Buchanan. They were murdered on the border as they travelled home. The story is, very clearly, that those two men were murdered while returning, and the reason the IRA knew they were coming through was that someone in the Garda Síochána passed the information through to the IRA, who then made sure that they were targets. Accountability? No one has ever been made accountable for that. Indeed, the Irish Government run away from it. It is time that they stood up and made sure that the inquiries that we all wish to see actually take place.
Again, it is the same thing for my cousin Kenneth, who I referred to earlier. The three people who murdered him and his companion were looking for victims for supported violence. When Kenneth Smyth was murdered, his best friend was Daniel McCormick, who just happened to be a Roman Catholic—but that did not matter to the IRA, of course. As far as they were concerned, he was a former member of the Ulster Defence Regiment. Therefore, he was a target, and he was murdered as well. I want to see justice for him and his family every bit as much as I do for my cousin.
When it comes to support and financial restitution, they gave Daniel McCormick’s wife and three children, one of whom was disabled, £3,500 pounds, I think. My goodness—it might have been back in 1971-72, but £3,500 pounds to rear your children and bring them up! They are all, of course, young adults today. The point I am making is that when it comes to restitution, we do not seem to have it. There can be no discussion of state support for victims without highlighting the need for justice for them. If you offered my cousin Shelley £100,000 in compensation, or the truth and accountability for Kenneth’s murder, I know what she would take. She would take the accountability and the need for truth. Those are the things that I would love to see.
However, we must also be practical and say that there are those who need that financial support as well, and that is also the thrust of this debate. All those people suffered that trauma, that ache and those recurring nightmares—perhaps we do not understand those things in their entirety, but they understand them, every day of their lives. We need to ensure that those who need our financial support get it.
With the death of a father or mother comes undoubted financial difficulty and disadvantage. It is right and proper that true victims of terrorism, while they can never be adequately compensated, are supported—and that is what this debate is about. That is why I welcome the commitment from the Minister and Government to this strategy, this policy and this way forward.
That leads me to my final point, which is to ensure that those victim makers, whose hands are not clean, but drip with blood, cannot ever access support or any form of financial compensation from this or any other successive Government. I welcome the news that this Labour Government, the Minister, the Prime Minister and others have said they are to ensure that Gerry Adams and other architects of heartache will be precluded from claiming compensation.
Whereas a libel case in the Republic of Ireland may seek to whitewash history—as it often does, unfortunately —I say unequivocally in this House today, using a phrase that has been said a thousand times to me, and which others will know: the dogs in the street know their own, and they know what Gerry Adams did. To ever conceive that he be due a form of compensation spits in the face of every victim of terrorism and indeed spits in the face of justice.
Today, we stand strong beside the victims of terrorism across this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. I respect the Minister, as I think we all do. He has lived a life; he is an honourable gentleman. He has served in uniform—he served in Northern Ireland—so he understands the issues and comes with the knowledge and experience that I believe is necessary for his role, both in this debate and in the future. The legislation will ensure that only victims, and never victim makers, are eligible to receive state support or help. I respectfully ask the Minister: when will it come to the House, and what measures will be put in place to ensure the Attorney General’s past support of Gerry Adams, as his legal representative, will not be a factor in any role that the Attorney General’s Office plays in the legislation?
To the true victims of IRA terrorism, of loyalist terrorism and of extremist terrorism across this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, support must always be given, and by extension to their families, and it must be withheld from the perpetrators. I believe in my heart that the Government must be crystal clear about that.