Gerry Adams's Blog, page 45

Climate Change – an avoidable human tragedy

If you believe the new President of the United States then global warming is a hoax. If you believe the mountain of hard data coming from countless scientific agencies then global change presents the gravest threat to the future of humanity.
Sea levels in the Irish Sea are now rising by three centimetres per decade. That’s seven centimetres since the early 1990s. For those of you like me who grew up on inches, feet and yards seven centimetres is almost three inches. It doesn’t sound a lot but that means we could see another half a metre rise in sea levels in the next fifty years. With most of our major cities and towns on this island, and around the world, sitting on the coast the environmental, economic and human cost associated with rising sea levels and the climatic changes that are giving rise to it, present huge life changing challenges to humanity.
Dr Conor Murphy of Maynooth University’s Irish Climate Analysis and Research Units (Icarus) also said: “The big thing for Ireland is rainfall and storms, with rainfall either too much or too little…“ And storms mean increased flooding upriver as more and more water tries to drain off toward the coast and too much water when it reaches the coast because of increasing sea levels.
Just before last Christmas, the UN panel of climate change experts concluded that humankind is to blame for global warming and warned that the planet will see increasingly extreme weather as events unfold, unless Governments take strong action. In its report the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warned that the world is ill-prepared for the risks arising from a changing climate. It also warned that many states could expect more frequent storms and flooding. That certainly has been the experience on our little island. The devastation along the Shannon river catchment area and the impact on families was horrendous. Many homes were totally destroyed by floodwaters.
Louth, and in particular part of the Dundalk area, also witnessed serious flooding. All of the families affected face a winter filled with dread. They are angry, they are concerned and those I met last year and have spoken to since tell me that flood defences have not been constructed and that their homes and businesses have no more protection now than they had last year.  
The weather is no respecter of the border. Among the storms which battered the island of Ireland last year one of the most damaging was Storm Frank. It was the sixth storm of eleven that hit between November 2015 and March 2016. The heavy rainfall and strong winds that Storm Frank brought disrupted travel and left 21,000 homes without electricity. At least 270 roads were blocked by flooding and fallen trees. Planes couldn’t land at either of Belfast’s two airports.
Two months ago the world passed a unique and dangerous milestone in our climate change process. According to all of the scientific data the atmosphere now carries over 400 ppm (parts per million) of carbon dioxide and is not expected to drop, probably for decades to come. This is a greenhouse gas that has a huge impact on our rising temperatures. This increase is almost entirely the responsibility of humanity which is consuming greater than ever amounts of our planets resources.
It is also melting the Artic icecap, with some scientists predicting that it could disappear entirely by the middle of this century. Mountain glaciers in Europe, Canada, Africa, the Himalayas and Asia are retreating. The Greenland icecap is melting. The introduction of huge amounts of fresh cold water into the north Atlantic and the impact this is having on the salinity of the north Atlantic Ocean is causing concern among climatologists. They believe there is a real risk that it could have an effect on ocean circulation, including the Gulf Stream which helps warm the island of Ireland.
A recent study in the journal  Science reported that the, "The rate of mass loss that the ice sheet is now exhibiting, post 2010, is somewhere in the neighbourhood of three times higher than the rate of mass loss prior to the 1980s… This means that Greenland is losing about 8,300 tonnes of ice per second each day.”
There have been alarming reports of the bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef off the coast of Australia. The Marine Park Authority, responsible for the reef, recently estimated that at least 22 per cent of the corals that make up the reef are dead. This is largely a response of warm water arising from climate change. The impact of this on other marine animals that rely on the coral is enormous.
To add to this disturbing pattern of significant changes in our climate the World Meteorological Organisation said that 2016 will be the hottest year on record. Its latest data reveals that 16 of the 17 hottest years on record have been since 2000.  
The Paris climate change agreement, which the Irish government and scores of other states, ratified several weeks ago, sets two key thresholds for planetary temperatures. The first is 2 degrees C above pre-industrial temperatures. The agreement argues that this must be avoided. The second is 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial temperatures which needs to be achieved as a way of limiting the warming that is occurring.
The World Meteorological Organisation says that global temperatures for 2016 achieved 1.2 degrees about pre-industrial levels. We are already dangerously close to breaching the second threshold and the global effect on climate is already posing huge problems for our eco system and for our future. The effect of climate is also evident in the humanitarian crisis in the Mediterranean. Many of those fleeing war and famine in Africa are also the victims of climate change. This year is the worst on record for refugee deaths. Over four and a half thousand men, women and children have died. In one 48 hour period last week at least 240 refugees drowned as thousands continue to brave the worsening weather in the Mediterranean to reach Europe.
Last week the United Nations held a climate change conference in Marrakesh. Its objective was to strengthen the agreement reached in Paris last year. As part of this the United Nations published its latest Emissions Gap Report 2016. Its objective is to track progress in restricting global warming to 1.5 - 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. It makes grim reading. It reveals that “overall emissions are still rising”. It concludes that “the Paris Agreement will slow climate change. The recent Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol will do the same. But not enough: not nearly enough and not fast enough. This report estimates we are actually on track for global warming of up to 3.4 degrees Celsius”.

So, urgent action is needed. Without it, according to the report’s authors “we will mourn the loss of biodiversity and natural resources. We will regret the economic fallout. Most of all, we will grieve over the avoidable human tragedy; the growing numbers of climate refugees hit by hunger, poverty, illness and conflict will be a constant reminder of our failure to deliver.

Irish America and the Peace Process

Light was fading over New York when I managed to escape for a brief period to stretch my legs and go for a walk through its streets and avenues. It was a crisp Friday evening and my second in the Big Apple. The previous night we had held our annual Friends of Sinn Féin fund raising dinner. It was a packed event and Seanadóir Rose Conway Walsh, Rita O Hare and I spoke to the 800 guests setting out our concerns around Brexit, the opportunities for progressing our goal of Irish unity, and the crucial role of Irish America in helping to ensure that the new incoming Trump administration adopts the same supportive role toward the Irish peace process that previous democratic and republican administrations have done.

As I walked up 6th Avenue several hundred, mainly young people, jogged passed me. Some were carrying crudely made placards while all were chanting. It took me only a few moments to realise that I was in the middle of a protest against President Trump.
‘Not my President’ some chanted. ‘Sexist, Racist, anti-gay Donald Trump go away’ was another refrain. A snatched glance at several of the placards saw one which read ‘We shall overcomb’, while another read ‘love always wins’ - surrounded by hastily drawn red hearts.
The crowd were quickly gone. They were heading toward Trump Tower which I had passed a short time earlier on 5thAvenue. It’s a big imposing building. It’s surrounded now by New York City police officers and Secret Service agents. CNN described it as “a fortress ringed by tight security.” Across from the front door is a bank of tv cameras and photographers monitoring every move in and out of the home of the new US President. One innovative journalist or blogger had a piece of wood attached to a strap around his neck – making an improvised desk on which he had his IPad resting - and was busy typing away.
In my three short days in New York I was struck by the sharply divided opinions on the election result from among those I met. Part of Sinn Féin’s success in the USA has been our ability to draw support from both Democrats and Republicans. We have very deliberately stayed out of domestic US politics and elections. Who American citizens vote for is a matter for them. We who have had centuries of foreign interference in our own affairs don’t wish to intrude on the rights of others. That doesn’t mean of course that when appropriate Sinn Féin does not raise issues of concern about US foreign policy with the administration. We do and I have.
Whether it was with President Clinton or Bush or Obama, or with various state department officials, I have voiced Sinn Féin’s opposition about US foreign policy and actions in respect of the Middle East, Israeli aggression against the Palestinian people of the west Bank and the Gaza Strip, in Iraq and Afghanistan and against the people of Cuba.
However, our priority is to defend and advance the Irish peace process; the political and constitutional arrangements that were achieved as a result of the Good Friday and subsequent agreements, and our republican objective of Irish reunification.
So, my appeal to Irish Americans – irrespective of their own political allegiances – was to urge them to stay focussed on and to continue championing the peace process and Irish unity. For over 20 years the Irish America has been the bridge out of Ireland into the political establishment in the USA and the driver for its engagement with the peace process. Irish America has achieved remarkable success.
With Brexit creating greater uncertainty we need Irish America to re-exert its enormous political strength to persuade the new republican administration to continue with US support for peace and progress in Ireland.
This connection between Ireland and Irish America was clearly evident last Saturday morning in New York. Under a beautiful blue sky several hundred grassroots activists came together to celebrate the centenary of the 1916 Rising. Council woman Elizabeth Crawley had proposed that a pedestrian thoroughfare in Maspeth in the Queens Borough be named ‘Easter Rising Way.’ It was a great initiative and New York Council approved it. And as the succession of speakers reminded us Irish America has been an integral part of the Irish story and of the struggle for freedom for hundreds of years.
Maspeth is a strong Irish American community. It is a few hundred yards from Calvary Cemetery where stands the Fenian Monument erected by the Irish Republican Brotherhood in 1907 in remembrance of the Fenians of 1865-67. It is also close to Celtic Park which in the years leading to the 1916 Easter Rising was a major fundraising venue for the IRB and Clan na Gael. In the decade before the Rising at least eight of the 1916 leaders spent some time in that great city, as well as touring across the USA. Both Thomas Clarke and James Connolly had made lives for themselves for a time here and others, including Joseph Plunkett and Roger Casement toured the US seeking support for the struggle.
New York was also the city of the famine Irish who fled to the United States in their hundreds of thousands to escape hunger and persecution under British rule. But before them it was also the home of some of those who fought in the 1798 Rebellion. I remember on one of my first visits to New York being taken by Brian McCabe to St Mark's-in-the-Bowery Churchyard in the East Village to visit the grave of Thomas Addis Emmet. Thomas Addis was the brother of Robert Emmet and one of the 1798 leaders. After he fled to New York he practised law and for a time was the New York State Attorney General.
Clann na Gael and Fenians like O Donovan Rossa and John Devoy raised money and arms for the cause. Much of it in New York. And when O’Donovan Rossa died it was Tom Clarke who asked that his remains be returned to Dublin where Padraig Pearse’s stirring oration at his  graveside in 1915 foreshadowed the 1916 Rising.
The following year when Pearse and others came to write the Proclamation they explicitly praised the role of the Irish in America. The Proclamation states, and I quote, “having patiently perfected her discipline, having resolutely waited for the right moment to reveal itself, she now seizes that moment, and, supported by her exiled children in America and by gallant allies in Europe , but relying in the first on her own strength, she strikes in full confidence of victory.”
Later in the most recent phase of struggle groups like Noraid, Clann na Gael, the Ancient Order of Hibernians, the Irish American Unity Conference and the Brehon Law Society all supported oppressed communities in the north.
But it was with the peace process that Irish America really made an impact on US policy toward Ireland. At a time when the British claimed that the issue of the North was an ‘internal matter’ for them it was Irish America that persuaded US politicians to intervene. Irish America was the driver that put Ireland and the Irish peace process on the agenda of successive US Presidents and kept it there. Irish America persuaded political leaders in the Congress to take risks for peace when it was not popular.
We need Irish America to continue with that work. We especially need it at this critical juncture to engage with their new President and Congress members and Senators, and to persuade them to stay the course with the Irish peace process.

Standing up for Ireland in the EU

The British political establishment and media like to describe Westminster as the ‘mother of Parliaments’. They ignore the cruel exploitation of scores of colonies during centuries of Empire and the widespread use of violence to suppress democratic demands. All of this is regularly brushed aside as the British system endlessly praises itself and inflates its sense of self-importance. Earlier this year an opinion poll found that 44 per cent of people in Britain were proud of its history of colonialism while only 21 per cent regretted that it happened. The same poll also asked about whether the British Empire was a good thing or a bad thing: 43 per cent said it was good, while only 19 per cent said it was bad. 25 per cent responded that it was “neither”.I would be confident that a similar poll in any of Britain’s colonies would paint a starkly different picture.The British are especially proud of their judicial system. This is despite the many miscarriages of justice against Irish people it perpetrated during the 1970’s and 80’s. However, the decision last week by the British High Court that Theresa May has to seek Parliamentary approval to trigger Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty to begin the Brexit negotiation, has led to a deepening crisis within the British state.One right wing British newspaper branded the three judges who took this decision as ‘enemies of the people’. The British right wing politician Nigel Farage has warned of violence on the streets. Add to this increasingly fraught atmosphere a plan by Farage to hold a 100,000 strong march in London on the day the British Supreme Court assembles to hear the appeal on December 5th. Does the British government know what it is doing? There is ample evidence to suggest it doesn’t. In the meantime the crisis for the island of Ireland around Brexit deepens with each passing day. Last week the Irish government held its Civic Dialogue forum on Brexit in Dublin. While the unionist parties disappointingly refused to attend nonetheless it was a valuable, wideranging conference which heard the views of political parties, economists, the civic and business sectors, the voices of rural Ireland and of agriculture, and of those community organisations that rely on EU Funding. Sinn Féin’s speakers highlighted the need for political alternatives to be agreed and for a diplomatic offensive, led by the Irish government, to build support for designated special status for the North within the European Union.This week a study published by the Department of Finance in Dublin, and the Economic and Social Research Institute, concluded that Brexit was going to be bad for the Irish state.It found that a hard Brexit would permanently damage the economy, reducing its size by almost 4% and increasing unemployment by as much as 2%.Last Thursday Martin McGuinness, Michelle O Neill and I met the Taoiseach Enda Kenny and the Minister for Foreign Affairs Charlie Flanagan at Parliament Buildings. They were at Stormont meeting some of the political parties about Brexit. Our conversation with them was part of Sinn Féin’s ongoing efforts to secure the position of the island of Ireland within the European Union. This is crucial given that Brexit will reshape arrangements and relationships between these islands and between us and the European Union. Our task must be to ensure that any new arrangements on this island are to the mutual benefit of everyone who lives here. This means there is an obligation on all of us to explore alternatives to Brexit - and all optionsavailable to ensure that the North can Remain within the EU.Rather than wait to see what the British government does, we need to be proactive about setting out alternatives - constitutional, political and otherwise - that protect and promote the national interests of our island. Specifically we believe that there is a need to build support for a designated special status for the North within the European Union.That threatens no ones constitutional preference and the Irish government, as a continuing member of the EU, has the right and in our view the obligation, to bring forward such a proposal. There is also a particular duty on the Irish Government as a member state of the European Union and as co-guarantor of the Good Friday Agreement to strongly safeguard the political, constitutional and legal integrity of the Good Friday Agreement – an international Agreement - in all its partsBritish governments have no difficulty acting in their perceived national interests. The Irish government must also act nationally, in the accurate and meaningful meaning of that word. It means defending the interests and the rights of the people of this island.As well as the enormous and unprecedented economic challenges that face us, the entire post-Good Friday Agreement all-island institutional and political architecture is under very serious threat from Brexit. For example: ·         The Conservative government has refused to put in place a Bill of Rights agreed in 1998·         They refuse to legislate for the rights of Irish speakers through an Acht na Gaeilge that was agreed at St. Andrews.·         And the British government is planning to scrap the Human Rights Act and to end their relationship with the European Convention on Human Rights which are integral parts of the Good Friday Agreement human rights infrastructure.As we seek to forge strategies to meet this challenge there are obvious priorities. These must include maintaining the Common Travel Area and the existing border arrangements to allow for the free movement of people and goods without trade tariffs, physical checks or passport controls.There also needs to be a specific focus on EU Funding. The North and the border counties depend on funding programmes including INTERREG and PEACE to continue building the peace and developing the economy and cross-border structural funds which bring massive economic and social benefits. CAP, the Common Agricultural Payments subsidy is essential for farmers.And finally there are the implementation bodies that exist because of the Good Friday Agreement. The North/South Ministerial Council manages six All-Ireland Implementation Bodies working on a cross-border basis, including, InterTrade Ireland; Waterways; Foras; Irish Lights; SafeFood and the Special EU Programmes Body (SEUPB) which administers the cross-border EU funding.All of these elements and the specific agreements on health provision and other matters, are part of an interlocking institutional and constitutional arrangement that has maintained the peace for almost 20 years. All of this is now at risk because of Brexit.There is now an urgency and an obligation to move the process forward and begin to look at alternatives to Brexit. That means accepting and acting in line with the will of citizens in the North to remain in the European Union. The decisions we take and the strategies we pursue will impact on generations to come. The choice is simple - acquiesce to the demands of London and allow the North to be dragged out of the EU, or pursue the credible path to argue at European level and with the British government for the North to be designated a special status within the EU. Just as there are massive challenges, there is also the opportunity to plot a new course and stand up for the majority of people who voted to remain, to stand up for our national economic interests of all-Ireland trade and employment, and to stand up for the agreements and progress.

A State in Denial

Last month the British government revealed plans to opt out of European convention on human rights. Prime Minister May set it in the context of trying to end what she called the ‘industry of vexatious claims’ against British soldiers in Iraq and in Afghanistan – those she described as the “finest armed forces known to man.” The real purpose is to protect British soldiers from the legal consequences of breaking international human rights law. But there is a deeper more self-centred motive for the actions of the British political establishment – it is about protecting itself. If we have learned anything in the decades of conflict in the North and since it is that the security apparatus of the British state, its soldiers, police and intelligence agencies operate according to rules and regulations laid down by the government. In order to defend these and those political leaders who create the legal and strategic framework within which they operate, the state has to ensure that the political establishment is protected.In this respect successive British governments, both Conservative and Labour governments, have been very successful. How could they not be? British governments create and fund the organisations that are responsible for investigating illegality. They pass the laws that define the powers and limitations of investigations. And as in the current row over money for legacy inquests they can deny investigators and the families of victims access to information and to the funding needed to carry out those investigations. However, the tenacity of families and of those who support them and the nature of the huge bureaucracy that is needed to run a modern political system means that sometimes the veil is lifted and the extent of political and security corruption is revealed. Margaret Urwin’s, ‘A State in Denial’ is a case in point. Through meticulous research and by combing through huge volumes of British state papers Margaret succeeds in uncovering a murky and duplicitous world in which the British state sanctions murder, and then engages in a political and propaganda strategy to deny it.
In one sense much of what is written of in ‘A State in Denial’ is not new. We have known for decades that the British government used the colonial tactics of counter insurgency and of counter-gangs to create the UDA and then facilitated the actions of that organisation and of the UVF. Collusion was a matter of institutional and administrative practice. The murder of human rights lawyer Pat Finucane by agents of the British state, using information provided by that state is one example of this. But there are countless others.‘A State in Denial’, provides overwhelming evidence for this by relying on the words of British civil servants, politicians and soldiers. In countless declassified documents, dated and detailed, the depth of collusion between the British government and its military, policing and judicial system is exposed and the lengths those governments will go to lie about all of this is laid bare for all to read. This is especially true of the British government’s attitude to the UDA which it refused to ban for 20 years despite a huge volume of evidence of its involvement in sectarian killings. Following its creation the UDA was used as an extension of the British state’s security apparatus. In one document dated October 1971, shortly after internment was introduced, it was decided to allow loyalist ‘vigilantes’ to work with the British Army. In orders from the British Commander of Land Forces British Army units were told to; “effect informal contact with unofficial forces in order that the activities and areas of operation can be co-ordinated and taken in account in the security plans for the areas concerned. The aim will be to effect liaison normally at company or platoon level between the security forces and all unofficial bodies who are seen to be working in the public interest.”As Margaret Urwin concludes; “All of the evidence from these official documents suggests that by the end of 1971 loyalist paramilitaries were in a favoured position … shielded from internment … and a decision was taken by the army and the British and Northern Ireland governments to adopt loyalists as an auxiliary force.”This approach extended to British Ministers publicly claiming that the UDA was little more than an ad hoc group of individuals and poorly organised vigilante groups. However, in a letter sent on July 10th 1972  a senior Civil Servant tells the Cabinet Secretary that “these groups are now well-disciplined, centrally co-ordinated”. The British state bias toward loyalists and especially the UDA, and the role of the locally recruited Ulster Defence Regiment, is revealed in an internal British Army memo of July 31st 1972. “The UDA is not an illegal organisation and membership of the UDA is not an offence under the military laws; it is also a large organisation not all of whose members can be regarded as dangerous extremists. One important (but unspoken) function of the UDR is to channel into a constructive and disciplined direction Protestant energies which might otherwise become disruptive. For these reasons it is felt that it would be counter-productive to discharge a UDR member on the grounds that he was a member of the UDA.”This approach facilitated the arming of the UDA. In a document, ‘Subversion in the UDR’ which is dated August 1973  and written by the British Army Military Intelligence and Psychological Operations staff, it is noted that “joint membership of the UDA and the UDR became widespread and at the same time the rate of UDR weapons losses greatly increased.”Margaret Urwin quotes from a Historical Enquiries Team (HET) report that states that “between October 1970 and March 1973, 222 weapons, including 32 handguns – belonging to the UDR were misplaced, lost or stolen from the homes of soldiers, UDR armouries, duty posts or while in transit.”At the same time British Ministers were denying that the UDA was involved in sectarian killings. In evidence to the European Commission on Human Rights in February 1975 General Tuzo, a former GOC for the North and former RUC Chief Constable Robert Shillington both denied that the UDA was engaged in a campaign of terror. Tuzo said: “The UDA was not a terrorist organisation … not a terrorist campaign. I would not describe it as terrorist at all, but this does not preclude at all, of course the campaign of murders and things later on, but that cannot necessarily be levelled at the UDA.”Shillington was even more direct; “The UDA declare themselves, they state who they are, there is no evidence that they engaged systematically in campaigns of terrorism.”The reality was very different. Between April and December 1972 loyalists groups had killed 101 people. 63 were killed by the UDA.Despite this British Labour and Conservative governments defended the claim that the UDA was not banned because it did not carry out sectarian assassinations. In private their position was very different. In an internal British briefing paper, ‘A Guide to Paramilitary and Associated Organisations’ dated 2 September 1976 it describes the UDA as “the largest and best organised of the Loyalist paramilitary organisations. It tries to maintain a respectable front and, to this end, either denies responsibility for sectarian murders and terrorist bombings or claims them in the name of the Ulster Freedom Fighters (UFF) a proscribed and essential fictitious organisation which is widely known to be a nom de guerre for the UDA.”


Margaret Urwin’s book adds significantly to our understanding of the decades of conflict and in particular the British government’s central role in perpetuating it. During those years and since the British government has dismissed or ignored the concerns raised by individuals and organisations, including the Irish government, surrounding its knowledge of and role in collusion. How often have Irish governments been rebutted when they have asked the British government about the Dublin-Monaghan bombs?  Do British governments care that within days of those attacks they legalised the very organisation that along with its double-agents, was responsible for them? Margaret Urwin’s ‘A State in Denial’ precisely describes the attitude of the British government today. But that denial is not a result of some misplaced sense of loyalty to those state agencies and political leaders that directed and carried out collusion. It is a product of the underlying imperial mind-set that ordered ruthless wars on citizens in Kenya, Malaya, Aden, Cyprus and the North of Ireland, and engaged in countless other colonial wars, including in Afghanistan and Iraq. It’s the mind-set which believes that the British Empire was decent and good and benign and which was exploited successfully in the immigration arguments heard during the Brexit campaign. 

A State in Denial by Margaret Urwin is published by Mercier Press

Remembering Máire Drumm:

In the years since her death Máire Drumm has become an iconic figure in Irish republicanism. She was an extraordinary, larger than life leader who was a woman, a mother, a grandmother, a political activist and visionary. I heard Máire speak many times. At internal party meetings but more often on the streets when taking a stand against injustice. She had an ability to speak from the heart and in language that resonated with people. She was a gifted leader and organiser, and an inspirational public speaker.Máire is best remembered for her leadership in the years following the pogroms of August 1969 when nationalist areas of Belfast were attacked by unionist mobs, the RUC and B Specials. Hundreds of homes were destroyed and thousands of men, women and children became refugees in their own city. And citizens died.During those early years of the ‘troubles’ the Unionist regime at Stormont resisted the demand for civil rights which were very modest. In the sexist sloganizing of the time it was ‘one man one vote’; an end to the Special Powers Act; an end to structured political and religious discrimination in employment and housing and an end to the gerrymandering of electoral boundaries that provided for unionist domination of local councils even where there was an overwhelming nationalist majority.Unionism was opposed to change. It applied the full military and paramilitary resources available to it. Including the resources of the British Army. No-go areas existed behind barricades of burned out cars and demolished buildings. Vicious hand to hand fighting and street rioting became the norm. British Army whippets and Saracens roamed the streets. Hundreds were arrested – in some instances for simply carrying hurley sticks and many were beaten. Máire’s response to this new law that banned the carrying of hurley sticks was to march to the court with scores of other women carrying hurley sticks.It was a time of huge turmoil in the life of the state and of families. And it needed an exceptional leader to provide clarity and focus and to give voice to the demands of citizens.Máire Drumm had been born in Kileen, in south Armagh on October 22nd 1919. Her family and especially her mother, was active during the Tan War and the Civil War. As a teenager growing up in a post partitioned Ireland, a few hundred metres from the newly imposed border, Máire understood the damaging effect of partition on Ireland and especially the border communities.She moved to Belfast in 1942 where she began a lifelong association with Gaelic games, serving in senior positions in Ulster and nationally in the Camogie Association. She loved camogie. And was one of those who was instrumental in organising and fundraising for the construction of Casement Park.Máire also worked in support of republican prisoners and was a regular visitor to republican prisoners in the 1940s. It was in this way that she met Jimmy Drumm, on a visit to Crumlin Road Jail. They were married following his release in 1946. The Drumm family home in Belfast became a centre of Gaelic culture, with Irish classes, dancing and music, as well as discussions on future of republican politics.Following the August pogrom in 69 the Drumm home also became an open house for refugees. Máire was actively involved in helping to rehouse refugees. Her daughters cooked for those who stayed with her and she succeeded in getting food and clothes and blankets for many of those who had been left with nothing.It was a time for courage and leadership and Máire Drumm stepped up to the plate. Despite harassment, death threats, imprisonment and a vicious and scurrilous campaign of hate by the British media, whipped up by the NIO, Máire refused to be bowed or broken and led from the front.Two of her closest friends and comrades were Mary McGuigan from Ardoyne and Marie Moore from Clonard in west Belfast. They served on the Ard Chomhairle of Sinn Féin together. In 1991 Mary and Marie were interviewed by An Phoblacht about their recollections of Maire. Their memories provide an insight into the strength of character and indominatable spirit of Máire Drumm.Mary McGuigan remembers Máire being arrested and going into Armagh women’s prison. She said: “In Armagh she was a great lift to the women.  She was much older and to the younger owns she was an inspiration in standing up for their rights. She was also deeply involved in their education and would speak for hours about the conflict and her vision of the future. She was looked on as a sort of mother figure but primarily as a leader.”Marie Moore recalled the curfew of the lower Falls in July 1970 when several thousand heavily armed British soldiers sealed off the area and systematically raided and wrecked scores of homes, assaulted residents and killed four men. Máire led the march that broke the curfew. “We had received word that there were beatings and atrocities happening and no one could get word in or out of the area. Máire along with a few others went around people she knew, knocking on doors and getting women to organise that first bread march into the lower Falls in an attempt to break the curfew.” There is a famous piece of black and white film footage which shows hundreds of women marching into the lower Falls and brushing armed British soldiers aside.During all of the traumatic events of that time Máire was there helping people in trouble, providing leadership, speaking up for people. Whether it was after internment or during marches in support of political prisoners, or when Long Kesh was burned to the ground.Marie Moore believed Máire’s focus on demanding equality for women in the struggle and in society was hugely important. “I remember her saying. Look women were on their streets when their areas were attacked. Their children were on the streets being shot defending their areas. The women were there when the barricades went up. They know all about the political realities of what is happening. They are quite capable of organising themselves and their areas.”On another occasion when she was being interviewed on TV Máire was asked about contraception which was then an emotive political issue. She said it was something she never had to worry about because the state sorted that out for her. Jimmy her husband was imprisoned in the 40s, the 50s, the 60s and the 70s.Máire was a tireless activist. She was constantly harassed and was arrested many times for her speeches and protests, especially in her opposition to internment. Her leadership qualities and her enormous courage led to her being elected as Sinn Féin’s Vice President.I met her many times including when I was on the run in Belfast. She was always genuinely concerned about how everyone was doing. When the politics was discussed it was like meeting your Mammy.Well-known for her defiant speeches at rallies and in courtrooms, she told a judge on one occasion: “Interning or putting a middle-aged woman in jail will not quench the flame of the Irish people because nothing but the destruction of the Irish people will ever quench that flame. Long live the IRA! God save Ireland!”Her home in Andersonstown was regularly raided and following Operation Motorman in July 1972, when the British Army entered the no-go areas in Belfast and Derry, the Brits built a huge British military base only a few yards from her home. But she was never cowed or intimidated.In October 1976, just days before her 57th birthday she was in the Mater hospital for a eye operation. A Unionist gunman, clearly acting in collusion with British forces, entered Máire’s room and shot and killed her.I was in Cage 11 in Long Kesh lying on my bunk writing a piece for Republican News when the radio reported her death. My first thoughts were of young Máire who was in Armagh women’s prison at the time and was almost certainly hearing the news at the same time as I was. And I thought of Jimmy and the clann. No one from the state ever called to the Drumm family home to tell them of what had occurred. And years later a new investigation by the Police Ombudsman has now begin into those events.But for the Drumm family and for the Republican family Maire’s loss was incalculable.Forty years later she remains an inspirational figure for today’s generation of activists. Her words continue to inspire us as we build Sinn Féin and advance the struggle for Irish unity and independence. In one of her most famous remarks Máire said: “We must take no steps backward, our steps must be onward, for if we don't, the martyrs that died for you, for me, for this country will haunt us forever."These remarks are relevant today as they were when Máire said them. We thank her for her life of struggle and we thank all the Drumm family for sharing Máire with us.

The centre ground and the politics of Tweedledee and Tweedledum

Following the February election Fianna Fáil engaged in a long drawn out charade of seeking to form a government. It refused to talk to Sinn Féin – as did Fine Gael – and spent weeks posturing. No one believed that a Fianna Fáil government was possible. At one point, under pressure from others in the establishment to end the crisis in government formation, Enda Kenny offered the Fianna Fáil leadership a partnership government. This was a good offer. And a brave one. It was rejected outright. Why?Fact is there is a genuine nationalist and republican instinct in the grassroots of Fianna Fail. They want a united Ireland. They know the Fine Gael leadership have no interest in this. Neither does its own leadership at this time but that’s another story. An alliance in government between the Blueshirts and the Soldiers of Destiny would leave sections of Fianna Fail voters looking for a new political home. A republican one. Sinn Féin?So FF and FG in Government was a no go. At least at this time.But a deal was reached between Fianna Fail and Fine Gael to form a minority Fine Gael led government with the help of Independents. Key to this is  a ‘confidence and supply’ agreement between the two larger parties in which Fianna Fáil agreed to abstain in the election of Taoiseach, the nomination of Ministers and the reshuffling of Ministers; to facilitate three budgets and to abstain on any motions of no confidence in the government. In return Fine Gael agreed to facilitate Fianna Fáil Bills and implement the policy matters set out in the ‘confidence and supply’ agreement.Essentially this is a partnership covering all of the key areas of governance including the economy, industrial relations and public sector pay, housing and homelessness, jobs, public services, crime and community services and putting off a decision on the toxic issue of water charges.Totally contrary to Fianna Fails election manifesto and mandate it puts Fine Gael in power with the support and blessing of Fianna Fáil.The Fianna Fail leader described this as ‘new politics’. It is nothing of the sort. It’s all about sustaining the status quo. Liam Mellows put it well during the Treaty debate in 1922, when he spelt out the consequences of partition and said: “men will get into positions, men will hold power and men who get into positions and hold power will desire to remain undisturbed…”However, Budget 2017 also marks another step in the slow, incremental realignment of politics in the South. The common interests of the Fine Gael and Fianna Fail leaderships crystallised more clearly than ever before. So much so that Fianna Fail never published an alternative budget of its own.Instead they and Fine Gael have also been very busy espousing the importance of so-called ‘centre ground’ politics. In his speech on the budget in the Dáil the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Paschal Donohoe said: “Those of us in the middle ground of politics have a duty to show that co-operation and consensus can work; to show that our tone can be moderate, but still convincing; and to show that things will not just fall apart and the centre can and will hold, stay firm and will grow.”He was followed minutes later by the Fianna Fáil spokesperson Michael McGrath who raised the spectre of the ‘extremes’. According to Teachta McGrath, “the bigger picture is that the centre ground of politics is under attack, not just here in Ireland but throughout Europe, and I agree with the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Paschal Donohoe, that there are various definitions of centre ground. When one looks at the alternative, one realises just how vital it is that the centre holds.”Later in the Dáil debate Thomas Byrne of Fianna Fail returned to the notion of the centrist politics when he claimed that it is the people of Ireland who “are at the centre of our thinking, as are the policies that will make change happen for them”.  Fine Gael Minister Simon Harris took time out of his Budget remarks to “agree with one point made by Deputy Byrne, namely, the one on the centre holding. There are many people on the extreme of Irish politics who would not have thought that we could have delivered a budget and who did not do anything to contribute to that process.”What does all of this mean? At one level it is about using fear -trying to frighten sections of the electorate into supporting Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil. At another level its complete nonsense. Michael Martin made a play for the centre ground of southern politics in a speech he gave to the MacGill summer school in the Glenties in July. In that he warned that it is the “extremes which are setting the terms of the debate” and he spoke of the challenge to “democratic societies”. Ironically in his critique of the referendum debate in Britain, and of the Brexiteers, he exposes the very same strategy that Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael are employing to try and see off the challenge from Sinn Féin. Martin accuses the British leave campaign of: “the classic scapegoating of an “other” or a “them” who could be blamed for all discontents.” And he claimed that the campaigners in favour of Brexit exploited the idea “that ‘if only “we” took back power and “they” were kept out we could discover a glorious past.’He said this with his brass neck shining brightly in the warm twilight of a Donegal forum. Sounds familiar doesn’t it? This from the man who has accused Sinn Fein of every conceivable foul deed known to humanity. Operation fear.At the same time the Fianna Fáil leader is verbally embracing Sinn Féin’s progressive policies. Fairness is the new buzz word.But Budget 2017 is not about fairness and equality. Nor can its politics end the crises in health and housing; or deliver tax fairness; or end water charges. On the contrary Budget 2017 represents the same old doublespeak and political manoeuvring of the past. There is no new politics just new language for an old story.The conservative parties remain firmly wedded to an ideology that prefers cuts to capital acquisitions tax for some of the wealthiest citizens in this State rather than investment in the health service. At a time when homelessness is at an historic level and people are being priced out of the rental and first-time buyers’ market, Budget 2017 will simply make matters worse. And the budget allocation for a health service in crisis will not resolve the underlying problems.And none of this takes into account the huge threat to the economy of this island and to society by Brexit.At a time when the shortcomings of partition are so obvious the partitionism of the Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael leaderships – the status quo and its maintenance – vindicate Mellows prophetic warning.
In the Dáil Sinn Féin is the opposition. In policy terms it is Sinn Fein’s articulation of radical republican politics and policies that is challenging the conservatism of Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil and Labour. Sinn Féin’s politics are embedded in the Proclamation of 1916. We are for economic equality and sustainable prosperity and a new republic which will deliver the highest standard of services and protections for all our citizens. It is these politics and policies that Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil fear.

Brits plan to ignore human rights laws - again

British governments like to pose as the defenders of freedom. Last year’s celebration by the British system of the 800th anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta sought to reinforce a political and historical narrative in which it is a beacon of light and justice for the oppressed of the world.
The truth is much different and last week’s Tory party conference exposed once again the British establishment’s largely xenophobic view of the world outside of England.
Theresa May described Britain’s armed forces as the “finest armed forces known to man.”In full Thatcherite mode she attacked “those left wing human rights lawyers” who she claimed “harangue and harass” those forces. The applause was loud and sustained. The British Prime Minister and her Ministers plan to protect their soldiers from the legal consequences of any criminal actions they might be responsible for by making them exempt from European human rights laws during any future conflicts.
This is not the first time they have tried to do this. It also ignores the reality that British soldiers have always been largely immune from prosecution for murders and torture carried out on behalf of the British state.
Examine the record. For centuries successive British government’s ruthlessly exploited a colonial Empire it established by force and held by force. Its historical record of abuse and corruption is often ignored, especially in Britain itself. The stealing of land, the exploitation of the natural resources of other places, and the military domination of a quarter of the Earth’s landmass and peoples is brushed aside as if it is of no consequence.
The horrifying experiences of scores of indigenous peoples, who in the last hundred years have had to fight the “finest armed forces known to man” in order to achieve their freedom is also ignored.
Whether in Ireland a century ago; or in south East Asia, in the African continent, or the Middle East, scores of wars have been fought by the British, up to and including Iraq and Afghanistan, to protect their economic and trading interests. Human rights violations are an intrinsic part of this. Torture. Beheadings. Summary executions. Famine. Concentration camps. Internment. Censorship. They have all been consistently used. Millions died. All of these policies were part and parcel of an overarching political strategy which used repressive laws and technologies to control and oppress national movements and to deny hundreds of millions of people their freedom.
In 1969 British troops arrived on our streets in the North and immediately began to apply so-called counter-insurgency strategies used extensively in previous wars. During the 70s, 80’s and 90’s Britain derogated from the European Convention on Human Rights many times. It did so because of its reliance on repressive laws and the illegal actions of its state forces. It was able to do so because under the rules of the Council of Europe, which oversees the Strasbourg-based institution, states can derogate from the Convention.
Directly through shoot-to-kill operations and through state collusion with unionist death squads British forces killed hundreds. British soldiers were largely immune from prosecution as is evidenced in This outcome is also true for British military operations in Kenya and Aden and Cyprus and in countless other wars. In the 21st century this modus operandi was used in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since 2004 the British state has paid out more than £100 million in litigation to victims. In Iraq twenty million pounds in compensation has been paid out in 326 cases.
And like the ‘hooded men’ who were victim of torture by the British Army and RUC after internment in 1971, the methodology used – the five techniques – have remained largely unchanged. The Iraq claims of torture, no less than the torture inflicted in the North, were not “vexatious”. As Britain’s politics lurch further to the right the attacks, on what one former British soldier called the ‘parasitic lawyers,’ has intensified. This narrative promotes a dishonest and deceitful view of British soldiers as innocents in wars with ‘terrorists’ and ‘insurgents’ and the lawyers as “activist left wing human rights lawyers.”
One former Lieutenant colonel, the Rev Nicholas Mercer, writing in the London Guardian last week accused the British government of inventing “an orchestrated narrative”. He wrote: “The idea that the claims are largely spurious is nonsense.”
It is successive British governments that have lied about using torture. On March 2nd 1972 the then Tory Prime Minister said: “The techniques which the committee examined will not be used in future as an aid to interrogation. The statement that I have made covers all future circumstances.” But even as he said this Heath knew it was a lie. And almost 40 years later the five techniques, involving sleep deprivation, the use of noise, hooding, and stress positions, and the deprivation of food and drink were still being extensively used in Iraq.
Like lawyers in the North who stood up against state injustice, human rights lawyers in Britain have sought to expose torture and to secure compensation for its victims. If Theresa May wants to end litigation against British troops during conflicts then she needs to end the violations of human rights by those troops.
And for those others who are horrified by the vitriolic attacks on human rights lawyers they should remember the fate of Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson. These were two brave human rights lawyers who dared to challenge the British state’s use of repressive laws in the North. Both were vilified by the British state. Both were victim of a campaign of hate from within the RUC and British intelligence agencies. Both were murdered.

Brexit battle lines are drawn

After five months of confusion over what Brexit will mean in practice the British Prime Minister Theresa May has finally given some substance to her ‘Brexit means Brexit’ line. The Conservative Party conference this week was an opportunity for the Tory Brexiteers in the British Cabinet to finally spell out the direction they plan to take.According to Ms May the British government will trigger Article 50 before the end of March 2017. This will begin the two-year process of negotiation by the end of which the British state will have left the EU. The British Prime Minister has now set the British state on the path to a so-called ‘hard Brexit’.This means that Britain will leave the single market. The emphasis in May’s speech was on independence and sovereignty with Britain taking back full control of immigration. Consequently, there will be no free movement of workers as the barriers to immigrants are raised and reinforced.  The British Prime Minister also said that Britain will leave the European Court of Justice which is the ultimate enforcer of European Laws. The Tories are already committed to scrapping the Human Rights Act and leaving the European Court of Human Rights. At the same time Tory Ministers were talking up the likelihood that Britain will leave the customs union.By insisting that Britain pursue a ‘hard Brexit’ Theresa May has set Britain on a collision course with the EU, in which Ireland, north and south, is regarded as collateral damage. She has moved from supporting the Remain side in the referendum last June to cow-towing to the right-wing of her own party.In the months since the Brexit vote there has been widespread concern that the border would become an international frontier. There were those who hoped that Britain would opt for a ‘soft’ option. The examples of the border between Norway and Sweden and the EU relationship with Switzerland were frequently promoted. In her speech at the Conservative Party conference Mrs May rubbished both.As a result, the British approach now puts in doubt the maintenance of the ‘common travel area’ between Ireland and Britain, which has existed since 1923. It also raises serious questions about the shape of the border post Brexit; the free movement of citizens; the likely impact on cross-border and bilateral trade, which accounts for one billion euro a week between Ireland and Britain and which supports 200,000 jobs.On Tuesday Edgar Morgenroth, an adviser to the Irish Government warned that the British stance ‘imperils the Common Travel Area’. He also warned against the belief that Dublin could negotiate some form of bi-lateral agreement with the British on trade and the movement of people. Under EU rules he pointed out that there are ‘no bilaterals here. It’s always the 27 EU countries and the UK.’Also at the weekend Prime Minister May called for preparatory work to be carried out between the EU and Britain in advance of March to facilitate a smoother process of negotiation. The response from the EU was immediate and dismissive. Donald Tusk, the President of the European Council rejected any suggestion of preliminary talks. The EU Commission has also warned Britain that there will be no informal discussions prior to Article 50 being triggered. And media reports also suggested that the German Chancellor Angela Merkel is against informal negotiations.So, the battle lines on Brexit have been drawn.The Tories are determined to exit the EU. They are also intent on pulling the North and Scotland out of the EU, despite both having voted overwhelmingly to Remain. Ms May told her party conference that there will be ‘no opt-out from Brexit.’ The Remain votes in the North and in Scotland are to be set aside. The Parliamentary convention that the Westminster Parliament will only legislate on matters affecting either the North or Scotland or Wales with the consent of the local Assemblies is also to be ignored.Martin McGuinness insisted at the weekend that the Remain vote in the North must be respected in any negotiation. He warned that the British government’s confrontational approach to Brexit threatens the North’s economy and the Good Friday and subsequent agreements. While both he and Arlene Foster are committed to doing their best for citizens the reality is that the DUP is committed to Brexit and this makes the political relationships and situation more problematic.At the same time two legal challenges began on Tuesday in Belfast High Court. One is being taken by Raymond McCord and the other by a group of MLAs, including Sinn Féin MLA John O Dowd, SDLP Leader Colum Eastwood, Steven Agnew of the Green Party and David Ford the Alliance leader. Their legal team will contest the legality of the process and they will argue that the North cannot leave the EU without the consent of the Assembly.Also on Tuesday in its response to Brexit the Irish government finally produced a series of proposals, including the establishment of an all-island Civic Dialogue. In July the Taoiseach had promised to bring the all-island dialogue forward in September. He failed to do this. Which is why I  accused him of dithering on this issue. The establishment parties of Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil seem to be mesmerised by what the British government is going to do as opposed to what the Irish government should be doing. Irish national interests have to be protected and promoted. The all-island civic dialogue will begin its deliberations in Dublin on November 2nd and will involve civic society groups, trade unions, business groups as well as political representatives.However, its overriding priority must be to advocate on behalf of the remain vote in the North. It’s worth remembering that 56% of the electorate backed remaining within the EU and 44% voted to leave. A strong majority. The Irish government must defend this vote. Last week when I raised this with the Taoiseach, as I have on previous occasions, he agreed that he would advocate in support of the Remain vote in the North.
Our focus in the time ahead must be to agree an all-island strategy that challenges Brexit. Martin McGuinness said at the weekend that Brexit is not a done deal. He’s right. So, on Saturday October 8th, if you oppose Brexit, join the campaign group, Border Communities Against Brexit, in its day of action. Protests will be held at six locations right along the border from Derry to Dundalk

The shame of the International Community

Imagine being so frightened and desperate that you are prepared to be packed tightly with your babies and children, and hundreds of other distressed and despairing people, into a cold dark storage room in the bowels of an old dilapidated boat? And then the absolute terror and panic as the boat rolls over and sea water suddenly floods in as the boat quickly sinks beneath the Mediterranean.That’s what happened last Wednesday to hundreds of men, women and children several miles off the coast of Egypt. The boat, which should only have held 200, was filled to overflowing with an estimated 600 refugees. Hundreds died. No one knows yet exactly how many. Only 169 were rescued and that was largely thanks to the quick response of local fishermen. Scores of bodies were recovered and the stench at the pier at El Borg was described as overpowering. Many more may never be found.Those who died were victims of human traffickers – smugglers who ruthlessly exploit the desire of those fleeing war and poverty to find a new life in Europe. Over three hundred thousand more have made the dangerous journey across the Mediterranean this year, some in the flimsiest of rubber dinghies or in boats totally unsuitable to such a crossing.The ongoing war in Syria and the economic and humanitarian crises in that region, and in North Africa, have led to one of the greatest humanitarian disasters of modern time. So far this year over three and a half thousand people, including many women and children, have drowned in the Mediterranean. As the search for hundreds of bodies from the boat that sank off Egypt last week continues that number will rise.The number who have drowned so far this year is now believed to be highest number of fatalities of any year. Across the world the International Organisation for Migration estimates that the number of deaths among refugees will exceed 10,000.At the same time that this tragedy unfolds in the Mediterranean region the war in Syria plumbs new depths of awfulness. Day after day the siege of Aleppo produces dreadful images of a city in ruins being systematically bombed out of existence. A quarter of a million people survive in Aleppo. There is little food and even less water. The doctors and first responders, with inadequate medical equipment and supplies, are exhausted trying to cope with the scale of deaths and injuries. A truce that was negotiated by the USA and Russia, and was intended to facilitate the distribution of humanitarian aid, has collapsed in recrimination following an air strike on a UN convoy heading for Aleppo. The Syrian government and its Russian allies blame rebel groups and the west and they in turn blame Syrian Government forces and Russia. And all the time the number of civilians killed grows. One radiologist in Aleppo at the weekend was quoted in the media: “We have just one message to the world today; We are pleading for them to help us stop these warplanes. Leave us under siege, we will deal with thirst and hunger. But please, stop these bombs.”But days later that cry for help has been ignored. The air attacks continue. The siege continues as Syrian government forces try to capture rebel held Aleppo. One western diplomat was also quoted saying: “The only way to take eastern Aleppo is by such monstrous atrocity that it would resonate for generations. It would be the stuff of history.”While the international community fails to effectively engage in a constructive effort to end the war what has been the response from Europe? The focus has been on reducing the number of refugees trying to reach the EU. The EU leaders summit at Bratislava last week produced more money for border guards.  But the ongoing tragedy in the Mediterranean is evidence that this crisis is not going away. According to the United Nations there are at least a quarter of a million migrants in Libya alone who are seeking ways across the Mediterranean. The Hungarian Prime Minister thinks he has the answer. He wants the EU to set up armed camps somewhere in Africa and to gather up all of the refugees and transfer them there. This shameful proposition should be repudiated by all fair minded people.Others have tried to chart a different course. Last week there was a meeting on refugees at the United Nations. A non-binding declaration was agreed. This governments pledge to uphold existing principles. Critics point to the fact that any proposals of substance were removed. However, there was some very limited progress in new commitments to aid.Sadly, the Irish government has not led from the front on this issue. Speaking in New York last week, where the Irish government co-chaired the UN summit on refugees the Tánaiste Frances Fitzgerald admitted that the Government has been “slow” in meeting its commitments to resettle Syrian migrants. Last year the government committed to accepting 4,000 refugees – a small number in light of the scale of the problem. Thus far it has failed to reach even this number. Less than a thousand have been resettled. The plight of people in Direct Provision Centres – some for over a decade – is a scandal and an indictment of successive Irish governments. Words cannot adequately describe the humanitarian disaster that is taking place in Syria or the EU’s treatment of refugees, including those in refugee camps. The international community has much to be ashamed of.

Covering up British Killings

Last week the Assembly resumed following its summer break. Next week it will be the turn of the Dáil. Normally we would be back in Leinster House by now but a major renovation is in progress and this includes a new sound system in the Dáil chamber. Next Tuesday it will be what passes for business as usual in the chamber but most of the rest of the original Leinster House building will remain out of bounds as work continues.
Among the first items I intend to raise will be the disgraceful attitude of the British government toward the Ballymurphy Massacre families. On Monday they met the current British Secretary of State, James Brokenshire. He is the fourth such Minister they have met in recent years. Their hope was that he would agree to release the funds needed for the inquests into the murders of their family members. The 11 dead were all civilians from the Ballymurphy district, including a mother of eight children and the local parish priest. They were killed by the British Paras in August 1971 in the days immediately after the introduction of internment.
It was another fruitless meeting with another British Secretary of State. The families walked out in frustration. John Teggart, whose father was among those killed described the meeting as “terrible”.
It’s 45 years since the Ballymurphy Massacre. The families have been tireless in their efforts to get to the truth. They have had some success along the way but the new inquests that were ordered in 2011 by the Attorney General are key to making more progress.
For this reason, there has been a deliberate policy by the British government and its intelligence agencies to block inquests. Currently there are scores of outstanding inquests into disputed killings by British state forces or unionist death squads acting in collusion with those forces. It is estimated that the average time these families have had to wait for an inquest thus far is close to 23 years.
The reality is that the British state is actively working to prevent the truth from emerging. The Historical Enquries Team (HET), which was established in 2005 to re-examine cases was actively blocked from accessing files held by the PSNI and British Ministry of Defence. It was eventually closed down when a report by the Inspectorate of Constabulary accused the HET of investigating killings by British forces will less vigour that it was using in other cases. The HET lost credibility as a result.
Like the HET the Police Ombudsman’s office has faced hurdles in accessing intelligence and policing documents relating to scores of murders, including those carried out by the infamous Glenanne Gang, which included members of the RUC and UDR. According to a new book, The History Thieves, by Guardian reporter Ian Cobain, the archive of documents that was painstakingly built up by the investigations of John Stevens into collusion were handed back to the PSNI in 2011. There are an estimated 100 tonnes of documents – 100 tonnes!!!!!
Today they sit in Seapark, a high security facility at Carrickfergus. The archive – which the PSNI Chief Constable George Hamilton called ‘The Vault’ is, according to Cobain ‘unreachable’. It includes the Stalker and Sampson reports into the RUC’s Shoot-to-kill policy of the 1980s, as well as files on collusion involving the UDR and the Military Reaction Force (MRF).
Cobain, whose book I will review in more detail in another blog, states that ‘The Vault’ is guarded by the ‘Legacy Support Unit’ of the PSNI; “Many of them are former Special Branch detectives, brought out of retirement specifically to perform this task.”
The Guardian reporter quotes Hamilton from a television interview in the course of which the Chief Constable describes the content of the Vault. He says: “If the Vault was to be opened, I know there will be literally millions of documents. I’m not just talking about intelligence documents, I’m talking about plans for covert operations, I’m talking about minutes of meetings. My understanding is that the IRA, the UVF and other players in this didn’t keep notes or minutes of meetings or records of decisions. We did. And I think all of that has left us somewhat exposed.”
Is it any wonder that successive British governments have gone to extraordinary lengths to withhold intelligence information and to obstruct families desperately trying to get to the truth of the death of a loved one?
The Lord Chief Justice for the North Declan Morgan has urged the British government to release the funds. He warned that failure to do this will mean ‘further devastation for grieving families’ and a delay of more decades before all of the outstanding cases might be completed.All of the North’s political parties want inquest funding released except for the DUP. Their opposition is designed to protect British state agencies and individual members of the RUC, its Special Branch and a range of intelligence agencies from being held accountable for the murder of citizens. The Irish government has a responsibility to assist all of these families. I have raised this with the Taoiseach many times. It is my intention to do so again.