Counter-Terrorism Legislation Review

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Wednesday 9th February 2011 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

Following the counter-terrorism legislation review the Home Secretary decided to replace section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 with a more tightly circumscribed power. Consistent with those changes, I have decided to make a similar amendment to a power of stop and search in Northern Ireland.

I intend to amend the power to stop and search a person without reasonable suspicion contained in paragraph 4 of Schedule 3 to the Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007. In future, prior authorisation by a senior police officer, confirmed by the Secretary of State, will be required before the power to search a person without reasonable suspicion to ascertain whether he has munitions unlawfully with him or wireless apparatus with him can be exercised by a police officer. I will also create a new power for police officers to search for such items with reasonable suspicion. In due course I will exercise the power in section 34 of the 2007 Act to make a code of practice governing the exercise of these powers.

Powers of stop and search for the military under the 2007 Act will not be amended.

Changes to the legislation will be brought forward in the protection of freedoms Bill, which will be introduced into Parliament shortly. Robert Whalley, the reviewer of the operation of these powers appointed under section 40 of the 2007 Act, is aware of the changes I plan to make.

Robert Hamill Inquiry

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Monday 31st January 2011 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

The House will be aware of the announcement made by the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) on 21 December 2010. In that statement, the PPS confirmed that, following a review of all the available evidence including that given to the Hamill tribunal, it concluded that the test for prosecution is met in respect of two persons for an offence of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice and one person for an offence of doing an act with intent to pervert the course of justice.

As I informed the House in my written statement of 16 December 2010, Official Report, 131WS, the Hamill inquiry intends to complete its report by the end of February. It remains my intention to publish the report as soon as practicable, but in light of the legal proceedings against these three individuals, I have decided not to publish the inquiry’s report until the legal proceedings have concluded; to do so would certainly jeopardise these individuals’ right to a fair trial. I understand from the inquiry that it is also the family’s wish that the legal proceedings are not prejudiced by the publication of the report. In the meantime, I am exploring ways of ensuring that the report is safely and securely stored between its completion and its publication.

Once the legal proceedings have concluded and the inquiry’s report is delivered to me, I am responsible for its publication. In anticipation of this, I have asked a small team of officials to commence the checking of the inquiry’s report in relation to human rights and national security matters, as outlined below. I intend to adopt the same approach as was used for the checking of the reports of the Bloody Sunday inquiry and the Billy Wright inquiry.

I am advised that I have a duty, as a public authority under the Human Rights Act, to act in a way that is compatible with the European convention on human rights (ECHR). To fulfil this duty, I need to take steps to satisfy myself that publication of the report will not breach article 2 of the convention by putting lives or safety of individuals at risk. I am advised that these obligations must be met by me personally, in my capacity as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.

Although the inquiry is also a public authority under the Human Rights Act, I am not entitled to rely on the inquiry to satisfy my article 2 obligations and I have a duty to assess this myself. I also have a duty to satisfy myself that publication will not put national security at risk, for example by disclosing details of sources of protected information.

I have established a small team to assist me in carrying out this necessary exercise. The team will be formed of the Northern Ireland Office’s principal legal adviser and an adviser from the Police Service of Northern Ireland. This team will be granted access to the report under strict terms of confidentiality and for the sole purpose of carrying out the necessary checks, and they will report directly to me alone. Sir Edwin Jowitt has agreed that this team can carry out the checks on the inquiry’s premises while the report remains in the custody of the inquiry. I understand that the report will be made available for checking today.

I want to publish the report in its entirety. Should any concerns about the safety of any individual arise, my first course of action would be to consider whether these can be addressed through alternative means. Were I to reach the conclusion, on advice, that a redaction to the text might be necessary, I would consult Sir Edwin Jowitt. In the very unlikely event that any redaction was deemed necessary, my intention would be to make this clear on the face of the report.

It is not possible to estimate how long the legal proceedings against the three individuals will take. I assure the House that once they have concluded, I intend to publish the report as soon as possible. Once a timetable for publication becomes clear, I will update the House accordingly.

Patrick Finucane

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Tuesday 11th January 2011 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

In my written statement of 11 November, Official Report, columns 25-26WS, I set out a period of two months during which I would receive representations as to whether it is in the public interest that I should establish a public inquiry into the death of Patrick Finucane. As part of this process my officials have had a constructive meeting with representatives of the Finucane family and a further meeting will be arranged. In light of the fact that useful discussions are under way between the family and the Government, I have decided, with the agreement of the family, to extend the period during which I will receive representations by two months. When this further period has concluded it remains my intention to consider the family’s views carefully and in detail, along with any other relevant representations I receive, before taking a decision as to whether or not it is in the public interest to hold a public inquiry into the death of Patrick Finucane.

Parades Commission for Northern Ireland

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Monday 20th December 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I am pleased to announce the appointment of a new Parades Commission for Northern Ireland. I have appointed Peter Osborne as chair and Douglas Bain, Delia Close, Brian Kennaway, Catriona King, Frances Nolan, and Robin Percival as members. They will all take up office on 1 January 2011.

The Parades Commission plays a vital role in ensuring that there is a means of dealing with contentious parades which allows for consideration of the rights of those who parade and those who are affected by parading.

I am confident that the new Commission brings a wealth of knowledge, skills and understanding, helping the Commission to meet the challenges ahead and build on its considerable achievements over the last 12 years.

Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission (11th Annual Report)

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Thursday 16th December 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I have today laid before this House a copy of the “Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission’s Annual Report and Accounts for 2009-10”, in accordance with schedule 7 paragraphs 5(2) and 7(3)(b) of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

This is the 11th annual report published by the Commission.

Robert Hamill and Rosemary Nelson Inquiries

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Thursday 16th December 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

It is with regret that I must inform the House of a delay to the publication of the reports of the Robert Hamill and Rosemary Nelson inquiries.

The Robert Hamill inquiry has recently informed me that it expects to deliver its report to me by the end of February 2011. The Rosemary Nelson inquiry informs me that it currently expects to deliver its report by the end of April 2011. I have written to both inquiries to ask them to expedite their work and to continue to bear down on costs in these remaining months.

As with the Bloody Sunday and the Billy Wright inquiries, it is my intention to publish these reports as soon as practicable after I receive them, and I will inform and update the House accordingly.

Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Thursday 16th December 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I have laid before Parliament the Third Report of Robert Whalley CB, independent reviewer of the Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Act 2007 (the “2007 Act”).



This Third Report provides an assessment of the operation of sections 21 to 32 of the 2007 Act and the procedures adopted by the Brigade Commander 38 (Irish) Brigade for receiving, investigating and responding to complaints. The report covers the period 1 August 2009 to 31 July 2010.

The report highlights the security situation in the past year and the activities of residual terrorist groups who have been dangerous and disruptive and remain heavily involved in organised crime. The reviewer states that the police have had to deal with more threats and attacks this year, and this has led to a substantial increase (22%) in the use of stop and question and stop and search across the range of police powers. He also makes note of the heavy demand for the services of ammunition technical officers (ATOs).

The reviewer acknowledges that the police have responded to his recommendation to further develop recording systems and notes some improvement from his limited sampling of the records; however, there is still some way to go in pursuit of best practice. He welcomes the development of electronic recording which the police are pursuing and the thematic review which is being conducted by the human rights adviser to the Policing Board into the comparative use of police powers and development of best practice. He comments that it will significantly complement and enhance work in this area.

Mr Whalley highlights the marked decrease in military complaints and notes that the departure of the Pumas of 230 Squadron RAF has significantly altered the pattern of military flying in Northern Ireland. He states that the complaints system is efficient and responsive and must continue to function as effectively as it does now. He also emphasises the importance of engaging complainants, and suggests that it should be standard practice to offer a visit to Aldergrove (if not a flight in a helicopter) when a repeat complaint is made. He recommends the flying station at Aldergrove should take it as a high-priority task to keep the website on planned flying times up to date.

The Chief Constable and the Brigade Commander 38 (Irish) Brigade have both welcomed the independent reviewer’s report and the recommendations made. I too would like to thank Robert Whalley for his work and for the recommendations contained in his third report. I will consider them carefully.

Oral Answers to Questions

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Wednesday 15th December 2010 Commons Chamber

[Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)]

1. What recent discussions he has had on steps to deal with the past in Northern Ireland.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

My hon. Friend the Minister of State and I have met with political parties, community organisations, academics and victims groups from across the community to discuss dealing with the past. We will continue to listen to the views of people in Northern Ireland to find a way forward on this sensitive and contentious issue.

[Mr Campbell]

The Secretary of State made a commitment, which he repeated several times, that there would be no more costly, open-ended inquiries. Any decision by him to hold a further, restricted inquiry—for example, into the Pat Finucane incident—would be opposed on the one hand by nationalists and republicans, but regarded by others as a prerequisite for long-standing grievances, against the Irish Republic’s Government, for example, to be inquired into. Is it not more sensible and consistent for the Secretary of State to say, “We’ve reached the end of the inquiry road”?

[Mr Paterson]

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. He is quite right: our stated policy is that we do not want to see any more costly and open-ended inquiries. However, my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said during the debate on the Saville statement that we would look at individual cases. Our position on the Finucane case—a contentious case, as the hon. Gentleman knows—was laid out clearly in my written ministerial statement on 11 November.

[Peter Bottomley (Worthing West) (Con)]

At the risk of broadening the question from the previous exchange, let me say to the Secretary of State that coming to terms with history is the responsibility of us all. Those who are British, those who are Irish and those who are both welcome the progress that has been made over the past few years and recognise that many have contributed to it.

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We want to bring as broad a range of people as possible into the process of negotiation, so that when we arrive at a means of going forward, as many people as possible have bought into it.

[Paul Goggins (Wythenshawe and Sale East) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State will know that the Attorney-General for Northern Ireland is in the process of reopening a large number of historical inquests, which will place significant additional financial burdens on the Courts Service and the police service. Given the Government’s responsibilities in relation to the past, how does the Secretary of State intend to approach the sharing of those costs?

[Mr Paterson]

The right hon. Gentleman played a key role in seeing those powers devolved. He will know that the administration of inquests is a devolved matter that is entirely in the hands of the Attorney-General for Northern Ireland. It would not be for us to interfere in the mechanics and financing of his Department, which are entirely down to the local Executive.

[Mr Shaun Woodward (St Helens South and Whiston) (Lab)]

Given the commitments by the British and Irish Governments at Weston Park, and the commitment by those Governments to an inquiry into the death of Pat Finucane, does the Secretary of State recognise that it would be unwise for the British Government to act unilaterally?

[Mr Paterson]

The right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that this is not an easy case, as he had three years to resolve the matter, as the real Secretary of State. He effectively ended up with a Mexican stand-off, where the family wanted one thing and he wanted them to have an inquiry, as I understand it, under the Inquiries Act 2005. He knows that this is not an easy matter to resolve, and that is why I had a helpful meeting with Mrs Finucane and her son. I laid out the process that we intend to follow in my written ministerial statement of 11 November.

[Mr Woodward]

The right hon. Gentleman will know that I have also met with Geraldine Finucane. I pay tribute to the way in which she has conducted herself, as I know he has too. However, notwithstanding his remarks about future inquiries, now that he is the real Secretary of State—as he described it—is he beginning to understand the damage that could be done to community support for the devolved institutions and to the British Government if he were to renege on existing undertakings, made by a previous Government and supported by his party in opposition, to independently investigate the past?

[Mr Paterson]

I cannot fail to point out that the right hon. Gentleman did not meet Mrs Finucane when he was the Secretary of State. I wrote to her in June, and I had a meeting in November, which was the time that the family chose, and we had a very sensible discussion. He knows that this is not an easy issue to resolve, and I laid out very clearly in the written ministerial statement that a number of issues have to be considered. We are quite open-minded about this, and we are determined to try to find a resolution that is satisfactory to all sides.

[Bill Esterson (Sefton Central) (Lab)]

2. What recent assessment he has made of the likely effect of proposed changes to public expenditure in Northern Ireland on policing the threat to security from dissident groups.

[Gregg McClymont (Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East) (Lab)]

3. what discussions he has had with the Northern Ireland Executive on the likely effect of proposed changes to public expenditure in Northern Ireland on policing the threat to security from dissident groups.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I meet the Justice Minister regularly to discuss the policing of the terrorist threat and related expenditure. I welcome the publication this morning of the Northern Ireland Executive’s draft budget, with its significant allocation to the Department of Justice. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that this Government will ensure that adequate resources are available to meet the threat.

[Bill Esterson]

Does the Secretary of State understand the very real public concern, not just in Northern Ireland but elsewhere in the United Kingdom, about any cuts in front-line policing in Northern Ireland and the impact that they would have on security and public safety?

[Mr Paterson]

I am fully aware of the concern that the small number of terrorists presents. That is why the Government have made a fair settlement on the Executive, and I am very pleased today that they have agreed a draft budget with a substantial allocation to the Police Service of Northern Ireland. We have made it absolutely clear that, should the security position deteriorate, we will be open to further discussions with the Executive, as was agreed by the previous Government.

[Gregg McClymont]

The Minister will be aware that the issue of fleet renewal is causing considerable concern. Will he support any request for additional funds from the PSNI to meet the case for fleet renewal?

[Mr Paterson]

I think that I alluded to that a second ago. We are quite clear that, should the security position deteriorate, and should a good case be made by the Justice Minister and the Chief Constable—one of whom I talked to this morning; I spoke to the other yesterday—we will be prepared to consider going to the contingency reserve for extra funds in order to bear down on the terrorist threat.

[Mr Laurence Robertson (Tewkesbury) (Con)]

Can the Secretary of State confirm that, if the situation were, regrettably, to get worse in Northern Ireland, either immediately or over the course of the next few years, those extra resources would come from the UK Government, rather than from the money already allocated to Northern Ireland?

[Mr Paterson]

We are absolutely clear about that. It was part of the settlement made by the previous Government that, should there be a deterioration in the security position in Northern Ireland, the Government of the United Kingdom would be prepared to accept a bid, on security grounds, for resources from the contingency reserve. I repeat that emphatically today. I said that to the Justice Minister when I spoke to him this morning.

[Mr Nigel Dodds (Belfast North) (DUP)]

In view of the recent revelations on the WikiLeaks website—which were confirmed by the former Irish Prime Minister, Bertie Ahern—that Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams had prior knowledge of the Northern bank robbery in 2003, can the Secretary of State confirm that co-operation will take place between the Garda and the PSNI, that a full investigation will take place, that no stone will be left unturned, and that the Historical Enquiries Team will be allowed to pursue this matter in the way that it is pursuing other cases in Northern Ireland?

[Mr Paterson]

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for his question. I think that the answer was well put by the party leader at the British-Irish Council in the Isle of Man earlier this week. We are quite clear that those who have a past can explain for themselves. For the present, however, we are content for those who adhere to the Mitchell principles and pursue their legitimate political aims by peaceful democratic means to play a part in the process. The other issues that the right hon. Gentleman raised are matters of law and order; they are matters not for elected Members but for the police and the prosecuting authorities.

[Mr Dodds]

I am grateful for that answer, as far as it goes. Of course, no one in the Chamber today was at the BIC meeting in the Isle of Man, so I would be grateful if the Secretary of State could elaborate on that point. Will he also make it clear that any resources that the Historical Enquiries Team needs to pursue these particular allegations will be forthcoming, and that the community in Northern Ireland can be assured of an equality of pursuit of allegations in Northern Ireland against dissident republicans and mainstream republicans if they were involved in terrorist activities, such as have been alleged not just by WikiLeaks but by the former Irish Prime Minister?

[Mr Paterson]

We are strong supporters of the work of the Historical Enquiries Team, who are looking at every one of the 3,268 deaths over the course of the troubles, and we are satisfied that they are absolutely colour-blind in approaching every one of these dreadful incidents. They have also been accredited with neutrality by European institutions, and we are happy that they should pursue their work, which is in the hands of the devolved Administration and financed locally. The Prime Minister and I have been on the record on many occasions, supporting the neutral work of the HET, because we know it does bring significant satisfaction to the families who have so far received reports.

[David Simpson (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

The Secretary of State will be aware that it has been announced that individuals from my constituency will stand trial next year for the murder of the soldiers in Antrim. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that the full rigour of the law needs to be applied and that the sentencing needs to fit the crime?

[Mr Paterson]

I think that is a sub judice issue. We support the rule of law and it should be pursued by the legitimate people in authority in the legal sphere and the judicial sphere. It is not for us as elected politicians to interfere.

[Stephen Pound (Ealing North) (Lab)]

I am grateful to the real Secretary of State for the comments he made earlier, but members of the PSNI tell me that two of their principal anxieties are the dissident threat and, obviously, financial uncertainty. On 10 November, the Secretary of State said that should the situation become worse, the PSNI would

“have the right to approach the Government”—[Official Report, 10 November 2010; Vol. 518, c. 276.]

—something which I think we all have. Today, he has gone a little bit further. Will he today stand four-square with the PSNI and say that, should the situation become more grave—which we hope it will not—he will support the PSNI in an application to the contingency reserve?

[Mr Paterson]

I welcome the hon. Gentleman to his new role. I will say emphatically, for the third time during this Question Time—and I said it to the Chief Constable yesterday and to the Justice Minister this morning—that should the security position in Northern Ireland deteriorate, we will adhere to the arrangements, which we have conceded were fixed by the previous Government, that given a deteriorating security position, the Justice Minister and the Chief Constable can come to the UK Government with a security case for funds from the contingency reserve.

[Mr Jeffrey M. Donaldson (Lagan Valley) (DUP)]

4. What discussions he has had with the Irish Government on arrangements for the proposed visit by Her Majesty the Queen to the Irish Republic.

--- Later in debate ---

[Robert Halfon (Harlow) (Con)]

8. What recent discussions he has had on the threat to security in Northern Ireland from residual terrorist groups.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

I meet regularly with my security advisers and David Ford to discuss the terrorist threat in Northern Ireland. The threat level in Northern Ireland stands at severe, meaning an attack is highly likely. So far this year there have been 206 arrests, both in Northern Ireland and the Republic, for acts of terrorism and serious criminal incidents related to terrorism.

[Robert Halfon]

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. How is he working with the Republic of Ireland to facilitate the cross-border strategy for dealing with dissident violence?

[Mr Paterson]

I am very grateful for that question. Co-operation with the Republic of Ireland on this issue is at an unprecedented level. I pay tribute to the outgoing commissioner, Fachtna Murphy, who has done a tremendous job, and I am delighted that Martin Callinan has been appointed as his successor. [Interruption.] A symbol of that was the cross-border strategy announced this week, showing the unprecedented collaboration between the PSNI and the Garda. [Interruption.]

[Mr Speaker]

Order. There are far too many noisy private conversations taking place in the Chamber. I call the Rev. William McCrea.

[Mr Paterson]

I am delighted to see the hon. Gentleman back in his place following his illness, as always asking pertinent questions. He will know that police levels in Northern Ireland are the highest in the United Kingdom at 4.2 per 1,000. The numbers of police are for the Chief Constable to decide—it is an operational matter—but as I have said on several occasions already in this Session, we will stand by Northern Ireland and if the Chief Constable and the Justice Minister make a good security case, we will consider access to the contingency fund.

[Mr Philip Hollobone (Kettering) (Con)]

9. What recent assessment he has made of the effects on the Northern Ireland economy of recent financial developments in the Republic of Ireland.

--- Later in debate ---

[Steve Rotheram (Liverpool, Walton) (Lab)]

10. What recent discussions he has had with the Northern Ireland Executive on the provision of resources to the Police Service of Northern Ireland to address security threats from dissident activity.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

PSNI resources are primarily a matter for the devolved Administration. I am delighted that the Executive have agreed a draft budget. This Government will work to support the PSNI where exceptional security pressures exist.

[Steve Rotheram]

Can the Secretary of State tell the House whether he has given the Chief Constable of the PSNI a specific assurance that he will continue to have access to additional funds from the reserve, so that vital community-based policing does not suffer from a lack of resource?

[Mr Paterson]

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his question. Of course, in Northern Ireland, community policing is an absolutely vital part of moving the process forward. The Chief Constable has been allocated significant resources in the draft budget today, and it is up to him how to apportion those significant sums of money.

[Jack Lopresti (Filton and Bradley Stoke) (Con)]

11. What plans he has to make Northern Ireland an enterprise zone.

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

My hon. Friend the Exchequer Secretary is writing to the Northern Ireland Executive this week with a draft consultation paper on rebalancing the Northern Ireland economy. He and I will be meeting Executive Ministers in the new year to discuss the paper before publishing it for consultation.

[Jack Lopresti]

Does my right hon. Friend agree that Northern Ireland’s high dependence on the public sector is simply untenable, and that it is more important than ever that private sector innovation be promoted in the Province, in order to rebalance the Northern Ireland economy?

[Mr Paterson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right on this, and I am very pleased to see his continued interest in Northern Ireland matters. We have been saying for three years now that an economy that depends for 77.6% of its GDP on state spending is wholly unsustainable. It will need rebalancing. That will take time. To do nothing is irresponsible; to move too fast is irresponsible, and I estimate that it will take, probably, 25 years. This week, we will be sending a paper to the Executive for discussion, looking at ways of turning the whole of Northern Ireland into an enterprise zone.

The Prime Minister was asked—

Departmental Expenditure Limits

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Tuesday 23rd November 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

Subject to parliamentary approval the Northern Ireland Office (NIO) will be taking a 2010-11 winter supplementary estimate. The effect this will have is to decrease the NIO’s Total DEL (excluding depreciation) by £1,169,047,000 from £1,203,205,000 to £34,158,000.

Patrick Finucane

Owen Paterson Excerpts

Thursday 11th November 2010 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Mr Owen Paterson)]

The House will be aware that one of my predecessors as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, the right hon. Member for Torfaen (Paul Murphy), announced in the House on 23 September 2004 that he would take steps to establish a public inquiry into the death of Patrick Finucane in 1989. To date no such inquiry has been established.

I believe it is right that I should determine the way forward in this case and that consequently I should set out a clear decision-making process both to the House and to the Finucane family. I met the family on 8 November to listen to their views and I have written to them formally inviting their representations as to whether it is in the public interest that I should establish a public inquiry into the death of Patrick Finucane. I will consider those representations carefully and in detail, along with any other relevant representations that I receive over the next two months, before deciding this question.

In addition to considering representations on the case, I shall also need to take into account a broad range of other factors in determining what the public interest requires. The other factors that I will consider when deciding the public interest will include:

The commitment given to this House in 2004;

The conclusions of reviews and investigations into the case and the extent to which the case has caused, and is capable of causing, public concern;

The experience of the other inquiries established after the Weston Park commitments;

The delay that has occurred since the 2004 announcement and the potential length of any inquiry;

Political developments that have taken place in Northern Ireland since 2004; and

The potential cost of any inquiry and the current pressures on the UK Government’s finances.



It is my intention to consider the public interest carefully and in detail at the end of the two-month period for representations and then to take a decision after such consideration as to whether or not to hold a public inquiry into the death of Patrick Finucane.