Gerry Adams's Blog, page 60
March 1, 2014
OTRs - A sham Crisis
The grandstanding by the DUP and other unionist politicians over OTRs is a sham crisis which has more to do with upcoming elections than with dealing with and resolving legacy issues.
In recent days there has been deliberate misrepresentation about the OTR issue and the provision of letters by the British government.
Unionist leaders have intentionally engaged in hyperbole and feigned anger over an issue that has been on the political and public agenda since the Good Friday Agreement negotiations.
The fact is that there was no agreement between Sinn Féin and the British government on how to resolve the issue of OTRs. Those who received the letters, as they are entitled to, were citizens who were not wanted by the British forces and they received their letters because this was the case.
Others who were wanted by the British for alleged offences would have been released under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement if they had been in prison. If they were tried and sentenced at any time after the Agreement they would have served only two years in prison.
Despite accepting that the position of OTRs was an anomaly under the Good Friday Agreement the British government did not produce a satisfactory way of resolving the matter. Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair’s Chief of Staff has acknowledged: ‘As we were not able to find an across the board solution that worked we had to deal with the ‘On the Runs’ as individual cases through an administrative system ...’
The administrative system is an entirely legal process, compliant with the law, involving all of the relevant senior law officers of the north and of the British state.
It is important to understand that the letters provided cannot be rescinded. If you’re not wanted – you’re not wanted.
The anomaly of OTRs has been referenced to publicly on countless occasions.
"The British and Irish governments acknowledged this at Hillsborough Castle in March 2001.
Several months later the issue of resolving the issue of OTRs was covered in Paragraph 20 of the Weston Park Agreement.
In May 2003 following negotiations at Leeds Castle the two governments issued a Joint Declaration, including a separate paper dealing specifically with OTRs.
And in October 2005 the then British Secretary of State said in the British Parliament that the government planned to legislate in respect of OTRs.
In January 2006 Sinn Féin and the other parties, for differing, reasons rejected the legislation but the OTR issue continued to be the focus of discussions publicly and privately.
"It has been the subject of discussion at Policing Board meetings at which SDLP and DUP members, some of whom are lawyers, were present; was referenced in the Eames/Bradley proposals; and is covered in Jonathan Powell’s account of the negotiations.
Powell for example, acknowledged talking to the DUP on this matter and that they accepted the implementation of the Joint Declaration proposals on OTRs provided they had a letter from Tony Blair effectively blaming Trimble.
The British government should ensure that if anyone else comes forward seeking clarification of their status that they are treated in the same way as the others covered by the administrative system Under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Human Rights Act all persons have a legal right upon request to be informed if the police require them for questioning.
The letter that those who made application received makes it clear that if any evidence emerges of any offence then the person receiving the letter can expect to face due process.
Clearly, despite all of the feigned brouhaha and hot air generated by unionist leaders this process is not an amnesty.
It is also worth recalling that the Good Friday Agreement, which the people of the island of Ireland overwhelmingly voted for in two referenda, saw the early release of over 400 republican political prisoners, and loyalist prisoners from jails in Britain and Ireland, north and south, many of whom were serving lengthy prison sentences.
The referenda vote reflected the desire of citizens north and south for an end to conflict and for peace and a recognition that the issue of prisoners was one that had to be resolved.
While the DUP campaigned against the Good Friday Agreement they lost that vote and are obliged to respect the democratic wish of the Irish people, including at that time a majority of unionists.
The DUP also signed on to work the power sharing institutions in 2007 and now share the Assembly and the Executive with former political prisoners.
In an effort to ensure that our past does not undermine the peace and the hope for a better future Richard Haass and Meghan O Sullivan produced a comprehensive compromise package to achieve this. Sinn Féin signed up for these. The DUP and other unionists thus far have refused.
The legacy of the past and parades issues and other matters are of such critical importance that the opportunity presented by the Haass proposals needs to be seized and seized now."
February 26, 2014
Policing Scadals: A Commission of Investigation is the only real option – Adams
Sinn Féin President Gerry Adams TD set out Sinn Féin’s analysis and proposals on the GSOC/Whistleblowers/McCabe dossier scandals in a lengthy speech to the Dáil this morning.
Below is an edited version of the main points and the full text of his remarks.
Deputy Gerry Adams:
· On this issue the Minister has failed miserably. What each of these scandals has demonstrated is an unhealthy close relationship between the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Garda Commissioner.
· Each scandal has highlighted an inability on the Minister's behalf to properly address the serious issues which have emerged for the justice system and An Garda Síochána.
· This runs in marked contrast to the rhetoric from the Government about ending cronyism and the need for transparency and accountability.
· On each occasion, the Minister's first instinct has been to circle the wagons around the Garda Commissioner and other senior Gardaí rather than seek to get to the bottom of the various allegations without fear or favour.
· We believe that the cumulative effect of these scandals and in particular the Minister's handling of them amount to an issue more serious than the position of the Minister for Justice and Equality. It is clearly now a matter of confidence in the administration of justice and policing and a high degree of confidence is necessary at public level among citizens.
· The Government appointed retired judge, John Cooke, to carry out a review of the various bits and pieces around. I wish him well but it is our considered opinion that the review under Mr. Justice Cooke is not sufficient. It falls far short of what is required to get to the bottom of this issue.
· I am from the North and I know what bad policing is. I lived in a police state for most of my adult life and I am proud to have played a small part in changing that. We need to have a situation where politicians get out of policing matters. Such matters should be administered in an accountable and fully independent way.
· In this case, the Minister should have backed out of it. He should have brought in the type of investigation that is allowed under the Commissions of Investigation Act.
· In respect of the McCabe dossier Gerry Adams said: These allegations may be totally and absolutely unfounded. I do not know and we have refrained from making any comment on that. Some of us have been on the receiving end of totally unfounded allegations for a very long time. However, these allegations were not new to the Minister for Justice and Equality. Indeed, the allegation is that he has known about them for two years.
· Yesterday, the Government announced the appointment of a barrister to examine the claims contained in the dossier. Yet again, in my view, that is not enough. I have listened to what the Taoiseach said yesterday and I thought he performed well in terms of how he outlined all this. This, however, is all in marked contrast to the mandate the Government was given when it was elected.
· Last week, I wrote to the Taoiseach asking him to come into the Dáil to make a statement on all these issues. As usual, the Oireachtas was bypassed by the Government. I was able to read about what was going to happen in the Chamber in Monday morning's newspapers.
· The Government's focus is on trying to manage public opinion on these issues.
· I was not surprised, therefore, when the Minister did not apologise because I knew in advance, as a result of reports in this morning's newspapers and on television last night, that he had no intention of doing so. That is one way of doing business but it is not real politics. It is the politics of spin and throwing shapes as opposed to that of making fundamental changes to the conditions in which people live and to the institutions and protocols by which we are governed.
· Any charge those in government have levelled at the individuals who preceded them in office is mirrored by the way in which they have gone about dealing with this issue. Even though the allegations that have been made are serious, grave and hugely devastating for the families and others involved, it is the way the Government has responded to them which has caused the crisis in confidence. It is clear - at least for now - that the Government is putting the Minister's interests above that of public confidence. I regularly find myself asking what on earth Labour is doing in government. I just do not know what is its function in the current Administration.
· The only credible and acceptable way to achieve clarity in respect of this chaotic episode and to bring it to a conclusion is through the establishment of an independent inquiry under the Commissions of Investigations Act 2004.
· I do not understand why the Taoiseach did not come before the House yesterday in order to announce an independent inquiry. Had he done so, he would have shown leadership and removed this matter from the realms of both party politics and politics in general.
· The way the Government has dealt with this matter is representative of that same old way of doing things. It is also part of the same old culture which those in government pledged to get rid of.
· That brings me to its treatment of brave people who have come forward. I refer to those who have identified that something is wrong, who have pursued all the proper and legal ways of resolving matters and who want a light to be shone on the various issues about which they are concerned. The people in question are not used to the focus of the media being upon them and neither are they used to public scrutiny. Their families are certainly not used to reading about them in newspapers. It takes very strong individuals to travel the obstacle course that has been erected. I commend those involved in this instance on doing that.
· The case for establishing an independent inquiry into the bugging scandal, which may or may not be a matter of substance, and the claims relating to the dossier presented by Sergeant Maurice McCabe under the Commissions of Investigations Act 2004 is unanswerable. During his lengthy contribution, the Minister failed to provide one credible reason as to why an inquiry under the Act should not take place. Yesterday, the Taoiseach also failed to provide a single good reason in this regard.
· In respect of the confidential recipient Mr. Adams said: We are now faced with the bizarre situation whereby, as a result of what he said about the Minister, Mr. Oliver Connolly's head has been the only one to roll in the aftermath of this series of scandals. The Minister did not utter one word about that matter during his contribution. He unilaterally sacked the man whom he saw fit to appoint to the position of confidential recipient.
· The evidence of the Government's performance is that there is little interest in effective systems of oversight or governance.
· Our Oireachtas team is not fazed by the Minister's arrogance and we will continue to hold him to account, I hope, in a fair, but robust and reasonable way. We support the essential role of An Garda Síochána. We have a commitment and we commend the commitment of the overwhelming majority of Gardaí who uphold the law and who look after all of us every day.
· Without seeking to draw any comparisons between the Garda Síochána and the old discredited RUC, it is clear that fundamental change is needed in the administration of policing and justice in this part of Ireland as well. It is very obvious there needs to be a clear separation of Government from the Garda Síochána.
· No police service, no senior police officer and no Garda Commissioner should be accountable to a politician no matter who that is. It does not matter whether it is Dermot Ahern or Deputy Alan Shatter or Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn. The citizens deserve a policing service which is overseen by an independent authority. The Garda Commissioner should be fully accountable to that authority, as should joint policing committees, and all of that should be accountable to the Oireachtas.
· Sinn Féin will soon publish its Garda Síochána (amendment) Bill 2014 and we will present our vision for change and our solution to the problems so evident over the past 18 months…
· This has been the Minister's greatest failure. He is not a stupid person. It is not the allegations of misconduct by some Gardaí that has eroded public confidence, it is his and the Government's failure to deal with these matters properly, fairly and in a transparent way. The Minister is bound to know that.
February 26th 2014
The full text of Gerry Adams remarks:
Deputy Gerry Adams: While I disagree with the Minister for Justice and Equality on many political and ideological issues, I respect the reforming focus he has brought to the necessary eradication of many outdated and inappropriate social anomalies in our system that work to the disadvantage of citizens. I wish to state as much clearly on the record.
However, on this issue the Minister has failed miserably. What each of these scandals has demonstrated is an unhealthy close relationship between the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Garda Commissioner. Each scandal has highlighted an inability on the Minister's behalf to properly address the serious issues which have emerged for the justice system and An Garda Síochána. This runs in marked contrast to the rhetoric from the Government about ending cronyism and the need for transparency and accountability. On each occasion, the Minister's first instinct has been to circle the wagons around the Garda Commissioner and other senior Gardaí rather than seek to get to the bottom of the various allegations without fear or favour.
Sinn Féin has come to these issues in a robust manner but we have come to them in a more measured way than our colleagues in Fianna Fáil. We believe that the cumulative effect of these scandals and in particular the Minister's handling of them amount to an issue more serious than the position of the Minister for Justice and Equality. It is clearly now a matter of confidence in the administration of justice and policing and a high degree of confidence is necessary at public level among citizens.
The first of these scandals came under the Minister's watch when it was revealed that two Garda whistleblowers, John Wilson and Sergeant Maurice McCabe, approached Deputy Clare Daly with their concerns regarding the quashing of penalty points by senior gardaí. In early 2012, the two whistleblowers brought their concerns to the then Garda confidential recipient, Oliver Connolly. After months of apparent stonewalling they decided to take their allegations and evidence to the Road Safety Authority, the Comptroller and Auditor General, various Departments and Ministers and an Teachta Daly. Then, in a move which has been the hallmark of the Minister's tenure, he attacked the complainants. In a television interview he made disgraceful allegations about an Teachta Mick Wallace which clearly came from the Garda Commissioner. As pressure mounted in the Oireachtas, the Minister then settled for an internal Garda inquiry into the issue to be carried out by assistant commissioner John O'Mahoney. After the report of this investigation, which was published in May of last year, the Minister sought to minimise concern about the implementation of the penalty points system by the Garda. He even went onto the plinth to attack the two whistleblowers in a scurrilous effort to undermine their credibility. The Minister would later, wrongly and disgracefully, accuse the Garda whistleblowers of not co-operating with the investigation. He has yet to correct the public record in that regard and he has failed to do so again today.
Not unreasonably, Sergeant Maurice McCabe has asked that if he did not co-operate with the O'Mahony report, why did that report not mention this? Why did the Minister, Deputy Shatter, not say so when he spoke after the report was published? Why was Sergeant Maurice McCabe not disciplined? Why did Assistant Commissioner O'Mahony's team contact and interview numerous officers all over the State, yet ignore Sergeant McCabe?
The O'Mahony report has since been discredited with the publication late last year of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General, which found that one in five motorists charged with traffic offences in this State were escaping points, that half of all summonses relating to traffic offences were not actually served, and that in some Garda districts there was a penalty points termination rate 50 times higher than in others.
That report led to the Oireachtas Committee of Public Accounts which was given a number of boxes of documents from the two whistleblowers backing up their allegations. A very defensive, and many would say a very arrogant, Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan gave evidence to the Committee of Public Accounts. He went as far as saying that the actions of the two whistleblowers were disgusting. These gardaí are mandated, trained and paid to uphold the law and report allegations of law-breaking, yet active efforts were made to prevent them from reporting what they believed were breaches of the law. Who is preventing them? It is the Garda Commissioner supported by the Minister for Justice and Equality.
The Minister, Deputy Shatter, sought to prevent Sergeant Maurice McCabe from providing evidence on the matter. Indeed, it appeared likely that he would initiate court action to prevent that. In my humble opinion, I think that is what forced the change, as the Minister was moved to proceed with some sort of review of all these matters, which in my view and that of my party Sinn Féin, is inadequate.
As all of this was unravelling, the revelation came that there was a suspicion of illegal surveillance and bugging at the offices of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC. Once again, the Minister's instinct was to seek to put GSOC in the dock. The Taoiseach went on to misrepresent the Garda Síochána Act when he claimed that GSOC had not fulfilled its legal requirements, that GSOC was a law-breaker. He repeated that despite me and others here questioning him until finally he was forced to admit his mistake. The Minister then summoned the GSOC chairman to his office to explain why the Minister and senior members of the Garda Síochána were not informed about GSOC's suspicions. The Minister is too smart. He knows that GSOC is not answerable to him but to the Oireachtas. However, by sending for the chairman he actively undermined the independence and integrity of that agency. That agency's responsibility is to police the police. It is not that the police are bad but we know to our cost that, human nature being as it is, accountability is necessary in all associations, organisations and institutions.
Having spoken to the GSOC chairman, the Minister told the Dáil there was nothing there and nothing to see. We then discovered that what the Minister had reported to the Dáil had sizeable omissions from what was sent to him in a written report. Subsequently, on the RTE "Prime Time" programme, Mr. Kieran FitzGerald of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, said that while there may be no definitive evidence of surveillance at the offices, he could not entirely rule it out. At the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions, Mr. FitzGerald said he suspected there may have been some form of surveillance carried out in their offices. Later on, it emerged that the security sweeps of the GSOC offices were carried out after it appeared that a senior garda - it is believed by sections of the media that this was indeed the Commissioner - had accessed confidential information about a case which was being investigated by GSOC. Layer upon layer has been added to this story day after day.
Following repeated calls by Sinn Féin and others for a fully independent inquiry into the bugging scandal, the Government did a partial about-turn a full ten days after the scandal first emerged. Interestingly enough, it was after the publication of Sinn Féin's Private Members' business motion calling for an independent inquiry. The Government appointed retired judge, John Cooke, to carry out a review of the various bits and pieces around. I wish him well but it is our considered opinion that the review under Mr. Justice Cooke is not sufficient. It falls far short of what is required to get to the bottom of this issue.
I am from the North and I know what bad policing is. I lived in a police state for most of my adult life and I am proud to have played a small part in changing that. We need to have a situation where politicians get out of policing matters. Such matters should be administered in an accountable and fully independent way.
In this case, the Minister should have backed out of it. He should have brought in the type of investigation that is allowed under the Commissions of Investigation Act. The Minister set the terms of reference for Mr. Justice Cooke but the Minister is already at the centre of this entire controversy. He put himself in there, although no one forced him into it. The Minister has already asserted that there was no evidence at all that GSOC was the target of a surveillance operation.
In the latest episode of an increasingly worrying saga for members of the public, last week a dossier from the Garda whistleblower, Maurice McCabe, was given to the Taoiseach by the Fianna Fáil leader. That was the right thing to do, as has been recorded. The dossier contained very serious allegations of Garda malpractice.
These allegations may be totally and absolutely unfounded. I do not know and we have refrained from making any comment on that. Some of us have been on the receiving end of totally unfounded allegations for a very long time. However, these allegations were not new to the Minister for Justice and Equality. Indeed, the allegation is that he has known about them for two years.
Yesterday, the Government announced the appointment of a barrister to examine the claims contained in the dossier. Yet again, in my view, that is not enough. I have listened to what the Taoiseach said yesterday and I thought he performed well in terms of how he outlined all this. This, however, is all in marked contrast to the mandate the Government was given when it was elected.
Last week, I wrote to the Taoiseach asking him to come into the Dáil to make a statement on all these issues. As usual, the Oireachtas was bypassed by the Government. I was able to read about what was going to happen in the Chamber in Monday morning's newspapers. I was able to read what the Minister was going to say, and the general tenor of his approach, in last night's news and in this morning's newspapers.
As I said to the Taoiseach yesterday, if the Minister was not going to hand this over to an independent agency to examine it under the terms of reference which are already set up, he should have come in to this House to talk these issues out, listen to what the Opposition and other Deputies may have had to say and then come up with a position. However, we have been hit with a fait accompli. We were simply told that a senior counsel is going to do a scoping exercise, so the mandate of everyone here amounts to nothing. The Government's focus is on trying to manage public opinion on these issues.
I was not surprised, therefore, when the Minister did not apologise because I knew in advance, as a result of reports in this morning's newspapers and on television last night, that he had no intention of doing so. That is one way of doing business but it is not real politics. It is the politics of spin and throwing shapes as opposed to that of making fundamental changes to the conditions in which people live and to the institutions and protocols by which we are governed.
I am sure members of the public are fatigued as a result of hearing about the events surrounding this matter over a protracted period. People's mortgages are in distress, their children are in the United States or elsewhere working, some have children in hospital and others cannot gain access to services for their aged parents as a result of the crisis in the area of health. When our parliamentary party meets, I ask my colleagues where the matters under discussion rate among people's concerns. Despite the fact that the other issues I referred to are obviously part of the daily grind for many citizens, there is no doubt that those under discussion also matter to them.
In the past five or six years people have learned a great deal about how this State has been run. They respect public servants, including the vast majority of members of An Garda Síochána. However, they also look to Governments to set matters right. Any charge those in government have levelled at the individuals who preceded them in office is mirrored by the way in which they have gone about dealing with this issue. Even though the allegations that have been made are serious, grave and hugely devastating for the families and others involved, it is the way the Government has responded to them which has caused the crisis in confidence. It is clear - at least for now - that the Government is putting the Minister's interests above that of public confidence. I regularly find myself asking what on earth Labour is doing in government. I just do not know what is its function in the current Administration.
The reaction to the events surrounding the GSOC scandal and the penalty points affair has been entirely insufficient. The decision to appoint a barrister to review these matters is not good enough either. The only credible and acceptable way to achieve clarity in respect of this chaotic episode and to bring it to a conclusion is through the establishment of an independent inquiry under the Commissions of Investigations Act 2004. I cannot for the life of me understand why the Minister will not facilitate such an inquiry. If he is as right as he claims to be in respect of these matters, then why will he not establish an independent commission to investigate them? If he did set up a commission, it would mean that there would be no further tit-for-tat exchanges involving himself and Deputy Martin. It would also mean that this would not continue to be an issue of party political points scoring in this Chamber. In addition, it would not become an issue of contention for the members of An Garda Síochána who are out patrolling and looking after our communities, our families and our security.
I do not understand why the Taoiseach did not come before the House yesterday in order to announce an independent inquiry. Had he done so, he would have shown leadership and removed this matter from the realms of both party politics and politics in general. On numerous occasions I have pointed out that what is happening in this case is symptomatic of a political culture which continues to exist in this State. Corruption does not always involve brown envelopes filled with money. It also involves the way in which people go about their business, cronyism, cosy relationships and operating in a bubble, and not understanding that politics must always be about the empowerment of citizens, upholding their rights and making political conditions better in order that everyone can be treated on the basis of equality. I am of the view that we will find a cure in this regard. The things I refer to are not natural disasters which suddenly came upon us. They are the products of humanity. These are things which we make and which we can unmake. We can certainly make them better if we have the will to do so.
The way the Government has dealt with this matter is representative of that same old way of doing things. It is also part of the same old culture which those in government pledged to get rid of. That brings me to its treatment of brave people who have come forward. I refer to those who have identified that something is wrong, who have pursued all the proper and legal ways of resolving matters and who want a light to be shone on the various issues about which they are concerned. The people in question are not used to the focus of the media being upon them and neither are they used to public scrutiny. Their families are certainly not used to reading about them in newspapers. It takes very strong individuals to travel the obstacle course that has been erected. I commend those involved in this instance on doing that.
The Government may only deal with its only electorate but I am of the view that it will find that widespread concern exists among the members of that electorate. People do not want the same old failed ways of doing politics. The Government is aware of this and that is why the parties which comprise it positioned themselves in the way they did in the most recent general election campaign. They knew that people were tired of the activities of those who had preceded them in government. Equally, people are going to become tired of the way in which the Government is dealing with this matter. They want the Government to deal with issues of this nature in an open, transparent and accountable way. The case for establishing an independent inquiry into the bugging scandal, which may or may not be a matter of substance, and the claims relating to the dossier presented by Sergeant Maurice McCabe under the Commissions of Investigations Act 2004 is unanswerable. During his lengthy contribution, the Minister failed to provide one credible reason as to why an inquiry under the Act should not take place. Yesterday, the Taoiseach also failed to provide a single good reason in this regard. In fact, he opined that such a commission may well be set up because that eventuality is implicit in the context of the senior counsel's remit.
Not long after the Committee of Public Account's hearings on the penalty points scandal, the transcript of a conversation between the confidential recipient, Mr. Oliver Connolly, and Sergeant Maurice McCabe was read into the record of the Dáil. We have all heard it several times. It states: "I tell you something Maurice - and this is just personal advice to you - if Shatter thinks you're screwing him, you're finished." One could not make it up. What prophetic words. We are now faced with the bizarre situation whereby, as a result of what he said about the Minister, Mr. Oliver Connolly's head has been the only one to roll in the aftermath of this series of scandals. The Minister did not utter one word about that matter during his contribution. He unilaterally sacked the man whom he saw fit to appoint to the position of confidential recipient. A public statement was made and it was a case of "Sin é, that's it". The Minister has never advanced any rationale for this decision. Why did he sack Mr. Connolly? What did he do wrong? The Minister is remiss for not even mentioning this matter. If the Government is to have any hope of restoring public confidence in the administration of justice, it must do what we have been advocating. When Deputy Mac Lochlainn has the opportunity to put questions to the Minister on this matter, perhaps he will advance, in a scholarly and appropriate way, the reasons that he has not utilised the legislation.
The evidence of the Government's performance is that there is little interest in effective systems of oversight or governance. The Minister earlier dismissed Sinn Féin's concerns on these issues. I remind the Minister that Sinn Féin's mandate from the citizens we represent here cannot be so easily dismissed. Our Oireachtas team is not fazed by the Minister's arrogance and we will continue to hold him to account, I hope, in a fair, but robust and reasonable way. We support the essential role of An Garda Síochána. We have a commitment and we commend the commitment of the overwhelming majority of gardaí who uphold the law and who look after all of us every day. In the North - a place which may be a foreign place for the Minister - Sinn Féin has worked tirelessly to ensure justice and policing is representative of the policing in the communities it seeks to serve. I was one of the people who was primarily involved in that and I can say that if we had not got an independent police authority, local joint policing committees, and an Ombudsman with real power, policing would not have been embraced. The people in the North who support Sinn Féin are law-abiding people, but we did not have a police service that suited the modern needs of people.
Without seeking to draw any comparisons between the Garda Síochána and the old discredited RUC, it is clear that fundamental change is needed in the administration of policing and justice in this part of Ireland as well. It is very obvious there needs to be a clear separation of Government from the Garda Síochána. No police service, no senior police officer and no Garda Commissioner should be accountable to a politician no matter who that is. It does not matter whether it is Dermot Ahern or Deputy Alan Shatter or Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn. The citizens deserve a policing service which is overseen by an independent authority. The Garda Commissioner should be fully accountable to that authority, as should joint policing committees, and all of that should be accountable to the Oireachtas.
Sinn Féin will soon publish its Garda Síochána (amendment) Bill 2014 and we will present our vision for change and our solution to the problems so evident over the past 18 months, namely, the penalty points debacle and the failure of senior Garda management to co-operate fully with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission. As I have said on previous occasions, out of these dark little periods good can come. I commend this Bill to the Minister. Rather than seeking to resist change - I have recorded my admiration for the Minister's reforming zeal on other issues - I ask him to embrace it. The Minister should be in the vanguard of this change. His first step should have been to establish independent inquiries into GSOC and whistleblower scandals as provided for under the Commissions of Investigation Act. This has been the Minister's greatest failure. He is not a stupid person. It is not the allegations of misconduct by some Gardaí that has eroded public confidence, it is his and the Government's failure to deal with these matters properly, fairly and in a transparent way. The Minister is bound to know that.
Below is an edited version of the main points and the full text of his remarks.
Deputy Gerry Adams:
· On this issue the Minister has failed miserably. What each of these scandals has demonstrated is an unhealthy close relationship between the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Garda Commissioner.
· Each scandal has highlighted an inability on the Minister's behalf to properly address the serious issues which have emerged for the justice system and An Garda Síochána.
· This runs in marked contrast to the rhetoric from the Government about ending cronyism and the need for transparency and accountability.
· On each occasion, the Minister's first instinct has been to circle the wagons around the Garda Commissioner and other senior Gardaí rather than seek to get to the bottom of the various allegations without fear or favour.
· We believe that the cumulative effect of these scandals and in particular the Minister's handling of them amount to an issue more serious than the position of the Minister for Justice and Equality. It is clearly now a matter of confidence in the administration of justice and policing and a high degree of confidence is necessary at public level among citizens.
· The Government appointed retired judge, John Cooke, to carry out a review of the various bits and pieces around. I wish him well but it is our considered opinion that the review under Mr. Justice Cooke is not sufficient. It falls far short of what is required to get to the bottom of this issue.
· I am from the North and I know what bad policing is. I lived in a police state for most of my adult life and I am proud to have played a small part in changing that. We need to have a situation where politicians get out of policing matters. Such matters should be administered in an accountable and fully independent way.
· In this case, the Minister should have backed out of it. He should have brought in the type of investigation that is allowed under the Commissions of Investigation Act.
· In respect of the McCabe dossier Gerry Adams said: These allegations may be totally and absolutely unfounded. I do not know and we have refrained from making any comment on that. Some of us have been on the receiving end of totally unfounded allegations for a very long time. However, these allegations were not new to the Minister for Justice and Equality. Indeed, the allegation is that he has known about them for two years.
· Yesterday, the Government announced the appointment of a barrister to examine the claims contained in the dossier. Yet again, in my view, that is not enough. I have listened to what the Taoiseach said yesterday and I thought he performed well in terms of how he outlined all this. This, however, is all in marked contrast to the mandate the Government was given when it was elected.
· Last week, I wrote to the Taoiseach asking him to come into the Dáil to make a statement on all these issues. As usual, the Oireachtas was bypassed by the Government. I was able to read about what was going to happen in the Chamber in Monday morning's newspapers.
· The Government's focus is on trying to manage public opinion on these issues.
· I was not surprised, therefore, when the Minister did not apologise because I knew in advance, as a result of reports in this morning's newspapers and on television last night, that he had no intention of doing so. That is one way of doing business but it is not real politics. It is the politics of spin and throwing shapes as opposed to that of making fundamental changes to the conditions in which people live and to the institutions and protocols by which we are governed.
· Any charge those in government have levelled at the individuals who preceded them in office is mirrored by the way in which they have gone about dealing with this issue. Even though the allegations that have been made are serious, grave and hugely devastating for the families and others involved, it is the way the Government has responded to them which has caused the crisis in confidence. It is clear - at least for now - that the Government is putting the Minister's interests above that of public confidence. I regularly find myself asking what on earth Labour is doing in government. I just do not know what is its function in the current Administration.
· The only credible and acceptable way to achieve clarity in respect of this chaotic episode and to bring it to a conclusion is through the establishment of an independent inquiry under the Commissions of Investigations Act 2004.
· I do not understand why the Taoiseach did not come before the House yesterday in order to announce an independent inquiry. Had he done so, he would have shown leadership and removed this matter from the realms of both party politics and politics in general.
· The way the Government has dealt with this matter is representative of that same old way of doing things. It is also part of the same old culture which those in government pledged to get rid of.
· That brings me to its treatment of brave people who have come forward. I refer to those who have identified that something is wrong, who have pursued all the proper and legal ways of resolving matters and who want a light to be shone on the various issues about which they are concerned. The people in question are not used to the focus of the media being upon them and neither are they used to public scrutiny. Their families are certainly not used to reading about them in newspapers. It takes very strong individuals to travel the obstacle course that has been erected. I commend those involved in this instance on doing that.
· The case for establishing an independent inquiry into the bugging scandal, which may or may not be a matter of substance, and the claims relating to the dossier presented by Sergeant Maurice McCabe under the Commissions of Investigations Act 2004 is unanswerable. During his lengthy contribution, the Minister failed to provide one credible reason as to why an inquiry under the Act should not take place. Yesterday, the Taoiseach also failed to provide a single good reason in this regard.
· In respect of the confidential recipient Mr. Adams said: We are now faced with the bizarre situation whereby, as a result of what he said about the Minister, Mr. Oliver Connolly's head has been the only one to roll in the aftermath of this series of scandals. The Minister did not utter one word about that matter during his contribution. He unilaterally sacked the man whom he saw fit to appoint to the position of confidential recipient.
· The evidence of the Government's performance is that there is little interest in effective systems of oversight or governance.
· Our Oireachtas team is not fazed by the Minister's arrogance and we will continue to hold him to account, I hope, in a fair, but robust and reasonable way. We support the essential role of An Garda Síochána. We have a commitment and we commend the commitment of the overwhelming majority of Gardaí who uphold the law and who look after all of us every day.
· Without seeking to draw any comparisons between the Garda Síochána and the old discredited RUC, it is clear that fundamental change is needed in the administration of policing and justice in this part of Ireland as well. It is very obvious there needs to be a clear separation of Government from the Garda Síochána.
· No police service, no senior police officer and no Garda Commissioner should be accountable to a politician no matter who that is. It does not matter whether it is Dermot Ahern or Deputy Alan Shatter or Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn. The citizens deserve a policing service which is overseen by an independent authority. The Garda Commissioner should be fully accountable to that authority, as should joint policing committees, and all of that should be accountable to the Oireachtas.
· Sinn Féin will soon publish its Garda Síochána (amendment) Bill 2014 and we will present our vision for change and our solution to the problems so evident over the past 18 months…
· This has been the Minister's greatest failure. He is not a stupid person. It is not the allegations of misconduct by some Gardaí that has eroded public confidence, it is his and the Government's failure to deal with these matters properly, fairly and in a transparent way. The Minister is bound to know that.
February 26th 2014
The full text of Gerry Adams remarks:
Deputy Gerry Adams: While I disagree with the Minister for Justice and Equality on many political and ideological issues, I respect the reforming focus he has brought to the necessary eradication of many outdated and inappropriate social anomalies in our system that work to the disadvantage of citizens. I wish to state as much clearly on the record.
However, on this issue the Minister has failed miserably. What each of these scandals has demonstrated is an unhealthy close relationship between the Minister for Justice and Equality and the Garda Commissioner. Each scandal has highlighted an inability on the Minister's behalf to properly address the serious issues which have emerged for the justice system and An Garda Síochána. This runs in marked contrast to the rhetoric from the Government about ending cronyism and the need for transparency and accountability. On each occasion, the Minister's first instinct has been to circle the wagons around the Garda Commissioner and other senior Gardaí rather than seek to get to the bottom of the various allegations without fear or favour.
Sinn Féin has come to these issues in a robust manner but we have come to them in a more measured way than our colleagues in Fianna Fáil. We believe that the cumulative effect of these scandals and in particular the Minister's handling of them amount to an issue more serious than the position of the Minister for Justice and Equality. It is clearly now a matter of confidence in the administration of justice and policing and a high degree of confidence is necessary at public level among citizens.
The first of these scandals came under the Minister's watch when it was revealed that two Garda whistleblowers, John Wilson and Sergeant Maurice McCabe, approached Deputy Clare Daly with their concerns regarding the quashing of penalty points by senior gardaí. In early 2012, the two whistleblowers brought their concerns to the then Garda confidential recipient, Oliver Connolly. After months of apparent stonewalling they decided to take their allegations and evidence to the Road Safety Authority, the Comptroller and Auditor General, various Departments and Ministers and an Teachta Daly. Then, in a move which has been the hallmark of the Minister's tenure, he attacked the complainants. In a television interview he made disgraceful allegations about an Teachta Mick Wallace which clearly came from the Garda Commissioner. As pressure mounted in the Oireachtas, the Minister then settled for an internal Garda inquiry into the issue to be carried out by assistant commissioner John O'Mahoney. After the report of this investigation, which was published in May of last year, the Minister sought to minimise concern about the implementation of the penalty points system by the Garda. He even went onto the plinth to attack the two whistleblowers in a scurrilous effort to undermine their credibility. The Minister would later, wrongly and disgracefully, accuse the Garda whistleblowers of not co-operating with the investigation. He has yet to correct the public record in that regard and he has failed to do so again today.
Not unreasonably, Sergeant Maurice McCabe has asked that if he did not co-operate with the O'Mahony report, why did that report not mention this? Why did the Minister, Deputy Shatter, not say so when he spoke after the report was published? Why was Sergeant Maurice McCabe not disciplined? Why did Assistant Commissioner O'Mahony's team contact and interview numerous officers all over the State, yet ignore Sergeant McCabe?
The O'Mahony report has since been discredited with the publication late last year of the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General, which found that one in five motorists charged with traffic offences in this State were escaping points, that half of all summonses relating to traffic offences were not actually served, and that in some Garda districts there was a penalty points termination rate 50 times higher than in others.
That report led to the Oireachtas Committee of Public Accounts which was given a number of boxes of documents from the two whistleblowers backing up their allegations. A very defensive, and many would say a very arrogant, Garda Commissioner Martin Callinan gave evidence to the Committee of Public Accounts. He went as far as saying that the actions of the two whistleblowers were disgusting. These gardaí are mandated, trained and paid to uphold the law and report allegations of law-breaking, yet active efforts were made to prevent them from reporting what they believed were breaches of the law. Who is preventing them? It is the Garda Commissioner supported by the Minister for Justice and Equality.
The Minister, Deputy Shatter, sought to prevent Sergeant Maurice McCabe from providing evidence on the matter. Indeed, it appeared likely that he would initiate court action to prevent that. In my humble opinion, I think that is what forced the change, as the Minister was moved to proceed with some sort of review of all these matters, which in my view and that of my party Sinn Féin, is inadequate.
As all of this was unravelling, the revelation came that there was a suspicion of illegal surveillance and bugging at the offices of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, GSOC. Once again, the Minister's instinct was to seek to put GSOC in the dock. The Taoiseach went on to misrepresent the Garda Síochána Act when he claimed that GSOC had not fulfilled its legal requirements, that GSOC was a law-breaker. He repeated that despite me and others here questioning him until finally he was forced to admit his mistake. The Minister then summoned the GSOC chairman to his office to explain why the Minister and senior members of the Garda Síochána were not informed about GSOC's suspicions. The Minister is too smart. He knows that GSOC is not answerable to him but to the Oireachtas. However, by sending for the chairman he actively undermined the independence and integrity of that agency. That agency's responsibility is to police the police. It is not that the police are bad but we know to our cost that, human nature being as it is, accountability is necessary in all associations, organisations and institutions.
Having spoken to the GSOC chairman, the Minister told the Dáil there was nothing there and nothing to see. We then discovered that what the Minister had reported to the Dáil had sizeable omissions from what was sent to him in a written report. Subsequently, on the RTE "Prime Time" programme, Mr. Kieran FitzGerald of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission, said that while there may be no definitive evidence of surveillance at the offices, he could not entirely rule it out. At the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions, Mr. FitzGerald said he suspected there may have been some form of surveillance carried out in their offices. Later on, it emerged that the security sweeps of the GSOC offices were carried out after it appeared that a senior garda - it is believed by sections of the media that this was indeed the Commissioner - had accessed confidential information about a case which was being investigated by GSOC. Layer upon layer has been added to this story day after day.
Following repeated calls by Sinn Féin and others for a fully independent inquiry into the bugging scandal, the Government did a partial about-turn a full ten days after the scandal first emerged. Interestingly enough, it was after the publication of Sinn Féin's Private Members' business motion calling for an independent inquiry. The Government appointed retired judge, John Cooke, to carry out a review of the various bits and pieces around. I wish him well but it is our considered opinion that the review under Mr. Justice Cooke is not sufficient. It falls far short of what is required to get to the bottom of this issue.
I am from the North and I know what bad policing is. I lived in a police state for most of my adult life and I am proud to have played a small part in changing that. We need to have a situation where politicians get out of policing matters. Such matters should be administered in an accountable and fully independent way.
In this case, the Minister should have backed out of it. He should have brought in the type of investigation that is allowed under the Commissions of Investigation Act. The Minister set the terms of reference for Mr. Justice Cooke but the Minister is already at the centre of this entire controversy. He put himself in there, although no one forced him into it. The Minister has already asserted that there was no evidence at all that GSOC was the target of a surveillance operation.
In the latest episode of an increasingly worrying saga for members of the public, last week a dossier from the Garda whistleblower, Maurice McCabe, was given to the Taoiseach by the Fianna Fáil leader. That was the right thing to do, as has been recorded. The dossier contained very serious allegations of Garda malpractice.
These allegations may be totally and absolutely unfounded. I do not know and we have refrained from making any comment on that. Some of us have been on the receiving end of totally unfounded allegations for a very long time. However, these allegations were not new to the Minister for Justice and Equality. Indeed, the allegation is that he has known about them for two years.
Yesterday, the Government announced the appointment of a barrister to examine the claims contained in the dossier. Yet again, in my view, that is not enough. I have listened to what the Taoiseach said yesterday and I thought he performed well in terms of how he outlined all this. This, however, is all in marked contrast to the mandate the Government was given when it was elected.
Last week, I wrote to the Taoiseach asking him to come into the Dáil to make a statement on all these issues. As usual, the Oireachtas was bypassed by the Government. I was able to read about what was going to happen in the Chamber in Monday morning's newspapers. I was able to read what the Minister was going to say, and the general tenor of his approach, in last night's news and in this morning's newspapers.
As I said to the Taoiseach yesterday, if the Minister was not going to hand this over to an independent agency to examine it under the terms of reference which are already set up, he should have come in to this House to talk these issues out, listen to what the Opposition and other Deputies may have had to say and then come up with a position. However, we have been hit with a fait accompli. We were simply told that a senior counsel is going to do a scoping exercise, so the mandate of everyone here amounts to nothing. The Government's focus is on trying to manage public opinion on these issues.
I was not surprised, therefore, when the Minister did not apologise because I knew in advance, as a result of reports in this morning's newspapers and on television last night, that he had no intention of doing so. That is one way of doing business but it is not real politics. It is the politics of spin and throwing shapes as opposed to that of making fundamental changes to the conditions in which people live and to the institutions and protocols by which we are governed.
I am sure members of the public are fatigued as a result of hearing about the events surrounding this matter over a protracted period. People's mortgages are in distress, their children are in the United States or elsewhere working, some have children in hospital and others cannot gain access to services for their aged parents as a result of the crisis in the area of health. When our parliamentary party meets, I ask my colleagues where the matters under discussion rate among people's concerns. Despite the fact that the other issues I referred to are obviously part of the daily grind for many citizens, there is no doubt that those under discussion also matter to them.
In the past five or six years people have learned a great deal about how this State has been run. They respect public servants, including the vast majority of members of An Garda Síochána. However, they also look to Governments to set matters right. Any charge those in government have levelled at the individuals who preceded them in office is mirrored by the way in which they have gone about dealing with this issue. Even though the allegations that have been made are serious, grave and hugely devastating for the families and others involved, it is the way the Government has responded to them which has caused the crisis in confidence. It is clear - at least for now - that the Government is putting the Minister's interests above that of public confidence. I regularly find myself asking what on earth Labour is doing in government. I just do not know what is its function in the current Administration.
The reaction to the events surrounding the GSOC scandal and the penalty points affair has been entirely insufficient. The decision to appoint a barrister to review these matters is not good enough either. The only credible and acceptable way to achieve clarity in respect of this chaotic episode and to bring it to a conclusion is through the establishment of an independent inquiry under the Commissions of Investigations Act 2004. I cannot for the life of me understand why the Minister will not facilitate such an inquiry. If he is as right as he claims to be in respect of these matters, then why will he not establish an independent commission to investigate them? If he did set up a commission, it would mean that there would be no further tit-for-tat exchanges involving himself and Deputy Martin. It would also mean that this would not continue to be an issue of party political points scoring in this Chamber. In addition, it would not become an issue of contention for the members of An Garda Síochána who are out patrolling and looking after our communities, our families and our security.
I do not understand why the Taoiseach did not come before the House yesterday in order to announce an independent inquiry. Had he done so, he would have shown leadership and removed this matter from the realms of both party politics and politics in general. On numerous occasions I have pointed out that what is happening in this case is symptomatic of a political culture which continues to exist in this State. Corruption does not always involve brown envelopes filled with money. It also involves the way in which people go about their business, cronyism, cosy relationships and operating in a bubble, and not understanding that politics must always be about the empowerment of citizens, upholding their rights and making political conditions better in order that everyone can be treated on the basis of equality. I am of the view that we will find a cure in this regard. The things I refer to are not natural disasters which suddenly came upon us. They are the products of humanity. These are things which we make and which we can unmake. We can certainly make them better if we have the will to do so.
The way the Government has dealt with this matter is representative of that same old way of doing things. It is also part of the same old culture which those in government pledged to get rid of. That brings me to its treatment of brave people who have come forward. I refer to those who have identified that something is wrong, who have pursued all the proper and legal ways of resolving matters and who want a light to be shone on the various issues about which they are concerned. The people in question are not used to the focus of the media being upon them and neither are they used to public scrutiny. Their families are certainly not used to reading about them in newspapers. It takes very strong individuals to travel the obstacle course that has been erected. I commend those involved in this instance on doing that.
The Government may only deal with its only electorate but I am of the view that it will find that widespread concern exists among the members of that electorate. People do not want the same old failed ways of doing politics. The Government is aware of this and that is why the parties which comprise it positioned themselves in the way they did in the most recent general election campaign. They knew that people were tired of the activities of those who had preceded them in government. Equally, people are going to become tired of the way in which the Government is dealing with this matter. They want the Government to deal with issues of this nature in an open, transparent and accountable way. The case for establishing an independent inquiry into the bugging scandal, which may or may not be a matter of substance, and the claims relating to the dossier presented by Sergeant Maurice McCabe under the Commissions of Investigations Act 2004 is unanswerable. During his lengthy contribution, the Minister failed to provide one credible reason as to why an inquiry under the Act should not take place. Yesterday, the Taoiseach also failed to provide a single good reason in this regard. In fact, he opined that such a commission may well be set up because that eventuality is implicit in the context of the senior counsel's remit.
Not long after the Committee of Public Account's hearings on the penalty points scandal, the transcript of a conversation between the confidential recipient, Mr. Oliver Connolly, and Sergeant Maurice McCabe was read into the record of the Dáil. We have all heard it several times. It states: "I tell you something Maurice - and this is just personal advice to you - if Shatter thinks you're screwing him, you're finished." One could not make it up. What prophetic words. We are now faced with the bizarre situation whereby, as a result of what he said about the Minister, Mr. Oliver Connolly's head has been the only one to roll in the aftermath of this series of scandals. The Minister did not utter one word about that matter during his contribution. He unilaterally sacked the man whom he saw fit to appoint to the position of confidential recipient. A public statement was made and it was a case of "Sin é, that's it". The Minister has never advanced any rationale for this decision. Why did he sack Mr. Connolly? What did he do wrong? The Minister is remiss for not even mentioning this matter. If the Government is to have any hope of restoring public confidence in the administration of justice, it must do what we have been advocating. When Deputy Mac Lochlainn has the opportunity to put questions to the Minister on this matter, perhaps he will advance, in a scholarly and appropriate way, the reasons that he has not utilised the legislation.
The evidence of the Government's performance is that there is little interest in effective systems of oversight or governance. The Minister earlier dismissed Sinn Féin's concerns on these issues. I remind the Minister that Sinn Féin's mandate from the citizens we represent here cannot be so easily dismissed. Our Oireachtas team is not fazed by the Minister's arrogance and we will continue to hold him to account, I hope, in a fair, but robust and reasonable way. We support the essential role of An Garda Síochána. We have a commitment and we commend the commitment of the overwhelming majority of gardaí who uphold the law and who look after all of us every day. In the North - a place which may be a foreign place for the Minister - Sinn Féin has worked tirelessly to ensure justice and policing is representative of the policing in the communities it seeks to serve. I was one of the people who was primarily involved in that and I can say that if we had not got an independent police authority, local joint policing committees, and an Ombudsman with real power, policing would not have been embraced. The people in the North who support Sinn Féin are law-abiding people, but we did not have a police service that suited the modern needs of people.
Without seeking to draw any comparisons between the Garda Síochána and the old discredited RUC, it is clear that fundamental change is needed in the administration of policing and justice in this part of Ireland as well. It is very obvious there needs to be a clear separation of Government from the Garda Síochána. No police service, no senior police officer and no Garda Commissioner should be accountable to a politician no matter who that is. It does not matter whether it is Dermot Ahern or Deputy Alan Shatter or Deputy Pádraig Mac Lochlainn. The citizens deserve a policing service which is overseen by an independent authority. The Garda Commissioner should be fully accountable to that authority, as should joint policing committees, and all of that should be accountable to the Oireachtas.
Sinn Féin will soon publish its Garda Síochána (amendment) Bill 2014 and we will present our vision for change and our solution to the problems so evident over the past 18 months, namely, the penalty points debacle and the failure of senior Garda management to co-operate fully with the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission. As I have said on previous occasions, out of these dark little periods good can come. I commend this Bill to the Minister. Rather than seeking to resist change - I have recorded my admiration for the Minister's reforming zeal on other issues - I ask him to embrace it. The Minister should be in the vanguard of this change. His first step should have been to establish independent inquiries into GSOC and whistleblower scandals as provided for under the Commissions of Investigation Act. This has been the Minister's greatest failure. He is not a stupid person. It is not the allegations of misconduct by some Gardaí that has eroded public confidence, it is his and the Government's failure to deal with these matters properly, fairly and in a transparent way. The Minister is bound to know that.
February 23, 2014
Basque Peace Process - Arms beyond use - An important step forward for Peace
In one part of Europe a vicious street war has led to the deaths of scores of people. The Ukraine has been convulsed by weeks of what some have described as a civil war. Efforts are currently underway to find a compromise that can bring peace. The key to these efforts is dialogue; both sides talking to each other and reaching agreement on a political way forward.
At the other end of the continent an International Verification Committee has confirmed that ETA has taken the first steps toward complete disarmament. At a press conference in Bilbao on Friday the Verification Committee confirmed that in January it oversaw the putting beyond operational use of an amount of arms, explosives and ammunition by ETA. It described this as a ‘hugely important step’.
I very much welcome this historic initiative by ETA. It is a major advance in the Basque peace process.
In both places – the Ukraine and in the Basque country - there is a clear desire for peace. In the Ukraine, European Foreign Ministers have been involved in brokering a peace deal. Europe holds its breath in the hope that it will work.
In the Basque country the dialogue for peace has been largely one-sided. The people of the Basque country, represented by a range of political parties and civic organisations, have been involved in recent years in a substantial dialogue around building a peace process. Their objective has been to bring an end to violence while creating the conditions for democratic and peaceful political change, including independence.
They took as their model the Irish peace process. Consequently, myself and other Sinn Féin leaders have travelled regularly to the Basque country to participate in this debate and to encourage its development. The strategy that has emerged, based largely on language and principles agreed here, commits Basque activists to using ‘exclusively political and democratic means’ to advance their political objectives. It seeks to advance political change ‘in a complete absence of violence and without interference’ and ‘conducted in accordance with the Mitchell Principles.’ And its political goal is to achieve a ‘stable and lasting peace in the Basque country’.
Making peace is not easy. It is especially challenging and difficult in the midst of violent upheaval. In the Ukraine it would appear that there is a general desire to step back from the brink and find a political solution to the political differences that exist. That takes real courage. But key to making any progress has been dialogue. A refusal to talk would condemn the Ukraine to greater violence.
The Spanish government needs to talk. Making peace is very challenging but I am confident that with political will the government in Madrid could engage positively.
Some will continue to argue that a policy of arrests and the imprisonment of political opponents is the only way. That didn’t work in Ireland. I believe this is the wrong approach. It runs counter to Nelson Mandela’s oft quoted mantra that to make peace we have to make friends with our enemy. That cannot be done in the absence of a dialogue. It cannot be done in the absence of respect for the rights of citizens to vote for elected representatives of their choice. So the responsibility of political leaders is to lead.
In this context the continued imprisonment of Arnaldo Otegi (Secretary General of SORTU) makes no sense and is deeply unhelpful. Arnaldo is a Basque leader totally committed to the peace process and to democratic and peaceful methods of politics.
The Spanish government also needs to remove bad laws which have no place in a peace process and which are an impediment to dealing with the issue of arms. This has become an issue following the decision on Saturday to bring the Verification Committee in front of a Spanish court.
Nor is the policy of dispersal of Basque prisoners from prisons close to their families conducive to the peace process.
Despite these and other problems the Basque people have repeatedly demonstrated in elections and on the streets their support for a peaceful resolution of the conflict in that region. The initiative taken by ETA and the belief that this is a process that will lead to complete disarmament is enormously significant. It is an opportunity that must not be squandered.
I appeal to the Spanish and French governments to respond positively to the announcement by the Verification Committee. The people have long historic links with the people of Spain, France and the Basque country. Our friendship goes back many centuries. The Spanish and French governments have a key role to play in promoting a process of dialogue that can advance the goal of a just and lasting peace in the Basque Country.
February 20, 2014
Bugging and surveillance – a cause for concern
Bug found in car used by Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness
Bugging devices in all shapes and forms, tracking devices to monitor movement, and remote controlled surveillance cameras were all an integral part of the British government’s war in the north. Over the years they were found in the homes of republican activists, under floor boards and cabinets, attached to wooden beams in attics, and hidden in the insides of cars.
In the years since the war ended the surveillance war has continued. It has become ever more sophisticated. Now according to some reports they can even bug your clothes. The information released by whistleblower Edward Snowden is evidence of the extent to which states and their agencies will go to spy on their citizens and on their allies, as well as their enemies. It’s all about information and information is power.
The surveillance technology involved today reads like science fiction but it is real not imagined and very effective, and most times you don’t know that it is there.
I remember an An Phoblact story one surveillance camera which had been found in a field over-looking a farm and road. It was camouflaged to look exactly like the branch of a tree. It was attached to another branch that contained a battery pack and was linked to a remote control transmitter. It also had, what was described as a thumper – a device to monitor vibrations in the ground in order to alert its controllers of its possible discovery.
In late 1999 a car used by Martin McGuinness and I was found to have been bugged and to have a tracking device attached. The highly sophisticated surveillance device was skillfully built into the body of the car in such a way as to make it impossible for anyone carrying out repairs on the vehicle to find the device. It was built to the specifications of the car and was colour coded to the car.
On an another occasion a colleague who worked with me in my west Belfast office discovered a listening device in her attic. Gerry Kelly found one made to resemble a long piece of wood screwed to beams under his floor boards in his upstairs landing. It was designed to pick up conversations in the living room, kitchen and bedrooms.
Connolly House bug
In September 2004 a listening device was found in Connolly House, the Sinn Féin headquarters in west Belfast. At the time we were involved in a particularly serious difficult with the British government covering the policing issue and the possibility of persuading the DUP to engage with the peace process. Most of our negotiating meetings were held in safe houses, where the risk of surveillance was less. The listening device was hidden inside what appeared to be a plank and was designed to commence transmitting if the front door of the office was opened. The British spooks who accessed the building planted it in the ceiling above the front office, which was then being used as a meeting room. It allowed the Brits to listen to conversations in the downstairs and upstairs rooms.
Several days after its discovery we brought the main portion of it to the negotiations in Leeds Castle in Kent and I handed it back to Tony Blair having once been deserted by Martin McGuinness who declared to the British Prime Minister that I was on my own. Mr. Blair was very bemused by the entire episode and as he examined the device he asked in a whisper ‘is it on?’
A few months later in January 2005 Eliza Manningham-Butler the head of MI5 admitted that her spooks were responsible for planting the bug. We eventually put part of the Connolly house bug up for sale on ebay where it raised several thousand dollars.
The discovery of bugging devices was always a cause of concern. The British were obviously seeking to gain advantage in the negotiations by trying to get an insight into our political strategy. But there were other even more serious implications in the use of surveillance.
Brian Nelson was a British intelligence agent. He was planted in the UDA and became the person responsible for providing the death squads with photographs and intelligence information on the movement of those it planned to kill. Much of his information and that provided to the UVF, LVF and other loyalist gangs, came from surveillance carried out by the British state, including through covert surveillance.
Roseann Mallon
Roseann Mallon was a 76 year old pensioner who was shot and killed when a unionist death squad from the UVF opened fire on her home at Cullenrammer Road, Dungannon in May 1974. It subsequently transpired that a British Army surveillance camera was filming the house. The camera was uncovered several months later. For almost twenty years the holding of the inquest was obstructed by the RUC and PSNI. Last November it emerged that the tapes had been wiped.I was reminded of these events because of the current controversy raging over the alleged bugging of the office of the Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission. GSOC has responsibility for oversight of the Garda.
The government has emphasised that there is no evidence of surveillance but the Commission said that the possibility of there being some benign explanation for some electronic anomalies found when they did a sweep of their office was ‘remote to zero.’
The handling of the issue by the government has been appalling and the Taoiseach and Minister for Justice in particular have succeeded in undermining the independence and integrity of GSOC. The Minister called in the Ombudsman when the story first appeared in a Sunday newspaper on Sunday February 9th. The Taoiseach criticised GSOC for not telling the Minister for Justice about their concerns. He claimed that the Ombudsman was required to report to the Minister under Section 80 para 5 of the Garda Siochána Act of 2005. Not true.
I challenged the Taoiseach on this several times however the continued misquoting of the Act by him, and the manner in which GSOC was hauled before the Minister gave the impression that the Ombudsman broke the law and did something wrong. The victim became the villain. This government behaviour has undermined the independence and integrity of GSOC.
The bugging controversy has also highlighted the dysfunctional relationship between GSOC, the Garda Commissioner and the Justice Minister and reveals a government that has not fully embraced the need for independent oversight of state agencies or institutions despite the fact that recent history has shown that it is the absence of such oversight which has been at the root of many of the scandals which have emerged recently.
The Irish experience of British surveillance strategies in the north is evidence that state surveillance is a fact of life. It has existed since spy organisations were first established. The methodology and technology has changed but the purpose has not – the gathering of intelligence to seek advantage.
Was the GSOC under electronic surveillance? There is enough doubt and sufficient evidence to warrant an independent inquiry to ascertain the truth and to examine also the government’s response to the initial revelations.
February 14, 2014
Remembering John Davey - Big Man - Big Heart
John Davey – Big in Heart and Spirit
Today is the 25th anniversary of killing of my friend and comrade Sinn Féin Councillor John Davey in the laneway of his home.
John was shot two days after the murder of Pat Finucane who was also killed by a UDA gang acting in concert with the RUC Special Branch and British intelligence.
John was killed by a resurgent UDA after it received a substantial amount of weapons brought into the north via the apartheid South African regime by an alliance of unionist death squads and British intelligence.
These are the bare facts. Regrettably most unionist politicians refuse to face up to this. In the debate over the past and the legacy of the conflict many prefer the narrative in which all of the pain is on the unionist side and all of the blame on the republican.
But in the debate on the past we have a duty and responsibility to remember all of the victims of the conflict. Each left a family or group of friends or a community of neighbours grieving for them. Each was a unique human being.
John Davey was one such unique person. For those who didn’t know him John was a big man. He was big physically. He was big in spirit and mind and vision. And he was big in heart. In south Derry he was for a generation of republicans the heart and soul of that community.
I knew John for many years. He was one of those iconic republican leaders who in the bad times stood firm and resolute and who led from the front. He was never cowed or broken or intimidated. John never allowed the threats or violence of the British or of the unionists to prevent him from doing his duty and pursuing his republican objectives. He was, like Pat Finucane, a fearless champion of human rights and equality.
John was born into difficult times. He grew up in an Ireland divided and into a northern state in which Catholics faced structured political and religious discrimination; a state in which thousands of Catholics were denied the vote in local elections; where council boundaries were gerrymandered; and where there was widespread discrimination in housing allocation and in employment. A place where Catholics were treated as second class or less.
In his day John was a freedom fighter, a political activist, a founding member of the civil rights movement, a political prisoner, a negotiator, an elected representative, a Sinn Féin leader, a father and a grandfather. He was a friend to those engaged in the struggle for peace and unity in Ireland and an implacable opponent of injustice and oppression and of British involvement in Ireland.
In the 1950s he was an IRA activist and was arrested and spent two and a half years interned in Crumlin Road prison. In the late 60s he played a pivotal and leadership role in the civil rights movement. In 1971 he was interned again. On that occasion he and his youngest daughter were arrested by a lorry load of British soldiers. Maria who was five, was held for several hours before being returned to the family – the youngest person lifted on that infamous morning.
John spent time in Magilligan prison, on the prison ship Maidstone, and then in the cages of Long Kesh. On one occasion he was so severely beaten that he suffered a fractured skull, two broken fingers, and a broken kneecap. After two years he was released but in July 1977 he was arrested again and charged with ‘collecting’ information. The basis of this bogus charge was the discovery of a map, which his son Eugene and all his classmates had as part of their geography course at St. Patrick’s College, Maghera. John was held for seven months before the charges were dismissed.
In 1983 John ran as the Sinn Féin Westminster candidate for East Derry. Two years later he won a seat on Magherafelt District Council. Unionists reacted angrily and as they did in Belfast and Lisburn and elsewhere and the Sinn Féin Councillors were attacked. John was struck over the head with a chair by a loyalist mob who had gathered in the public gallery. On another occasion the DUP MP Willie McCrea named John under privilege in the British Parliament as an IRA activist.
On Tuesday 9th February 1988, John escaped a murder bid when his car came under fire as he left his home. Michael Stone was behind that attempt. John escaped uninjured but one year later John was ambushed again as he returned home from a council meeting. John Davey was shot and killed on February 14th1989.
He was another of those irrepressible and defiant Irish republicans who never flinched in the face of injustice and stood tall and strong in defence of the rights of the Irish people. John was never daunted. He was a constant source of resolute determination and conviction. I am enriched by having known him. My thoughts are with John’s wife Mary, his children Eugene, Pauline, Maria and his grandchildren.
February 6, 2014
Pat Finucane: 25 years later the search for truth continues
The story of Pat Finucane has been told and retold many times. He was one of almost 4,000 citizens to die as a result of the war in the north. Pat was also one of hundreds, perhaps over a thousand, to die as a consequence of state sponsored collusion between British state forces and unionist death squads.
These deaths were not the result of ‘bad apples’ or ‘rogue elements’. Collusion was a matter of institutional British government policy. It was part and parcel of Britain’s political and military strategy in the six counties. A member of the UDA (Ulster Defence Association) or the UVF (Ulster Volunteer Force) or the LVF (Loyalist Volunteer Force) or some other loyalist grouping, may have been responsible for pulling the trigger or planting the bomb, but the weapon used, the training provided to use it, the intelligence needed to carry it out, and the encouragement given to do it, were in part or in total the responsibility of the British state.
Whether it was the 120 killings listed in the recent publication ‘Lethal Allies’ or the 224 who died after the weapons from the apartheid regime in South Africa arrived in 1987 with the connivance of British intelligence, or the many more killings that occurred, the policy of employing counter-gangs or surrogate gangs by the British state was directly responsible for countless deaths.
It was as Anne Cadwallader concluded in ‘Lethal Allies’ an ‘inescapable fact, established beyond doubt by these events’ that ‘successive British governments and their law enforcement agencies entered into a collusive counter-insurgency campaign with loyalist paramilitaries. It was thoroughly unethical – and it failed dismally. It was also illegal under international law.’
However the case of Pat Finucane has taken on international significance because of the circumstances surrounding his death in February 1989 and the courageous and unstinting campaign of Geraldine, his wife, and the Finucane family.
Next week it will be 25 years since two UDA gunmen burst into the Finucane home and shot Pat and wounded Geraldine in front of their three children. In the years afterward it emerged that the agent who provided the information for the killers, Brian Nelson, was a senior British Military Intelligence agent; the UDA leader who ordered the attack was an RUC Special Branch agent; the UDA quartermaster who provided the weapons was an RUC Special Branch agent and one of the two UDA men who carried out the shooting was an RUC Special Branch agent.
In the summer of 2001 the British and Irish governments agreed to appoint a judge of international standing to undertake a thorough investigation of allegations of collusion in the cases of RUC Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and RUC Superintendent Bob Buchanan, Pat Finucane, Lord Justice and Lady Gibson, Robert Hamill, Rosemary Nelson and Billy Wright.
A retired Supreme Court of Canada judge, Peter Cory concluded that five inquiries should proceed. All have concluded except that of Pat Finucane. The British government refuses to hold an inquiry.
In 2011, in an effort to frustrate the demand for an inquiry and to limit the damage of any further examination of Pat’s killing, the British appointed a senior lawyer Desmond de Silva to review the papers in the case. In his report published in December 2012 de Silva concluded that members of the RUC encouraged the attack on Pat Finucane; passed information on Pat to those who killed him; and failed to prevent the murder.
One of many damning conclusions by de Silva states: ‘The real importance, in my view is that a series of positive actions by employees of the State actively furthered and facilitated his (Pat Finucane’s) murder and that, in the aftermath of the murder, there was a relentless attempt to defeat to defeat the ends of justice.’
However, in a decision that stretched credulity de Silva decided that despite clear evidence of involvement by the ‘the different strands’ of the state that there was no ‘over-arching state conspiracy to murder Patrick Finucane.’
The British Prime Minister said he was ‘deeply sorry’ for what had happened. His government, through a statement by the British Secretary of State in Parliament a year earlier, had already apologised and acknowledged that collusion had taken place.
But all of this was a subterfuge – a political and PR strategy aimed at defusing the demand for an inquiry while defending the British state and specifically the British Prime Minister of the day Margaret Thatcher and her Ministers. Cameron pointed to de Silva’s claim that there was ‘no political conspiracy’ and that ‘ministers were misled’ and he ruled out a full public and independent inquiry.
Geraldine Finucane succinctly and accurately summed up the British government’s efforts to avoid an inquiry. She said: ‘At every turn, dead witnesses have been blamed and defunct agencies found wanting. Serving personnel and active state departments appear to have been excused. The dirt has been swept under the carpet without any serious attempt to lift the lid on what really happened to Pat and so many others.
This report is a sham, this report is a whitewash, this report is a confidence trick dressed up as independent scrutiny and given invisible clothes of reliability. But most of all, most hurtful and insulting of all, this report is not the truth.’
The Finucane family are determined to pursue truth and justice for Pat. They deserve our respect and our utmost support in their endeavours. The Irish government, as a co-equal partner to the British government needs to face up the Cameron government at every opportunity, publicly and privately and internationally, with its failure to honour its commitment on this matter.
Pat Finucane was devoted to human rights. As a lawyer, working under the most difficult of circumstances in a judicial and court system corrupted by extensive repressive laws, Pat worked diligently on behalf of those who were victim of British state violence. His goal was justice. His family deserve justice also.
Pat Finucane Events
This weekend a series of events organised by Relatives for Justice will be held to mark the 25th anniversary of Pat Finucane’s killing.
Sunday: February 9th between 7 and 7.30pm a Candlelit vigil at the junction Fortwilliam and Antrim Road.
Tuesday: February 11. At 1pm a rededication of Pat Finucane mural at former Andersonstown Barracks site.
Wednesday: February 12th. Between 1 and 1.30pm a vigil at the High Court in Belfast.
Wednesday: February 12th. Lecture in Queen’s University at 6pm.
January 30, 2014
Section 31 and Visa Denial
Censorship is about closing down dialogue. It’s about influencing and shaping public opinion. It is about persuading citizens to sustain the status quo. Sometimes censorship can be very public and written into law and enforced. Other times it can be more subtle but just as insidious. Ireland north and south has experienced both.
Censorship is about denying citizens their right to information and persuading them to embrace or acquiesce silently to injustice. Censorship is about control.
In his 1996 song ‘Yellow Triangle’, dedicated to the victims of the holocaust, Christy Moore’s lyrics warn of the dangers of censorship and of apathy. It is based on a poem by Pastor Martin Niemoller who spent 8 years in Nazi concentration camps.
“When first they came for the criminals I did not speak
Then they began to take the jews
When they fetched the people who were members of trades unions
I did not speak
When they took the bible students
Rounded up the homosexuals
Then they gathered up the immigrant’s and the gypsies
I did not speak
I did not speak
Eventually they came for me and there was no one left to speak.”
In the north during the years of conflict official and unofficial censorship had the objectives of supporting Britain’s war policy; defending discrimination; demonising a whole community; covering up the murder of citizens through the use of state collusion with unionist death squads; and excusing the use of torture and repressive laws.
Censorship and the control and manipulation of the media was applied equally ruthlessly in the 26 counties through Section 31.
Section 31 was a key element in a censorship and demonization strategy going back almost 30 years. Section 31 was introduced by Fianna Fáil in 1971 and was then tightened by Labour Party Minister Conor Cruise O Brien. It was renewed annually by Irish governments. It ensured that people in the 26 counties received a totally one-sided account of the conflict in the north and of its consequences for the whole of the island.
Section 31 reinforced partitionism and prolonged the conflict. It meant that Sinn Féin members were prevented from speaking on any issue. The RTE Authority was sacked, some journalists lost their jobs or were moved to less important positions, and the RTE management of the day imposed a harsh regime of self-censorship.
When Sinn Féin won elections our opponents – the losers – were interviewed. Republican voters were disenfranchised. British Army, UDR accounts of incidents were broadcast. Sinn Féin or local accounts were ignored.
Sinn Féin’s Larry O Toole, who was also a trade union leader, was banned by RTE from speaking about a strike in the Gateaux bakery in 1990. There were countless other examples. The atmosphere in RTE was reminiscent of the McCarthy era in the USA with the NUJ reporting in 1976 that journalists were afraid to question the government on its policy in respect of the north.
Visa denial in the United States was also about censorship and the denial of information. It meant that U.S. citizens were not able to receive information about the situation in the north which the British government insisted was an internal matter for it to deal with.
This favoured Britain’s military and political aims. From partition, but especially during the war years the British implacably opposed any international directly, and especially US interest or involvement in the north.
The attitude of successive Conservative and Labour government’s was best summed up by Quintin Hogg, a senior Tory Minister who was asked by Irish Timesjournalist Conor O Clery “if the intervention by Irish-Americans such as Senator Edward Kennedy on Irish issues made any impression on the British government. His face reddened and he slapped an open palm on his polished desk. ‘Those bawstards’, he cried. ‘Those Roman Catholic bawstards! How dare they interfere!'
But dare they did and 20 years ago this month an important step change took place as Sinn Féin and our political allies in Irish America succeeded in persuading President Clinton to provide me with a visa to enter the USA.
This was a key part of our peace strategy. We knew that the Irish cause needed to be internationalised. Within the USA there was a huge Irish American community that had a strong sense of its Irishness and a desire to challenge British propaganda in the U.S. Many were involved in justice campaigns around the Birmingham Six or the Guildford Four or Plastic Bullets or the MacBride campaign for an end to discrimination in employment against Catholics. They also wanted to see a real and lasting peace achieved. It was natural that we would look to Irish America for help.
In 1993 Bill Flynn, who was then the chairman of the board of Mutual of America Life Insurance Company, convinced the National Committee on American Foreign Policy to host a conference on the north in New York. They invited all of the party leaders from the six counties, including me.
To say that the British opposed the invitation is an understatement. However the Irish Ambassador to Ireland Jean Kennedy Smith and her brother Ted Kennedy along with a host of Congressional members, including Ben Gilman, Peter King, Tom Manton, Richard Neal and others lobbied for the visa.
On January 14th 1994 I applied for the visa to attend the conference which was organised for February 1st. The British government began an intense private and public campaign to keep me out. The British Embassy and its ambassador Sir Robin Renwick worked round the clock arguing that a visa for me would be a diplomatic catastrophe.
Two weeks later on January 29th President Clinton announced his decision to authorise the visa. It was to be a restricted visa for two days only and I had to remain within New York. But it was still a visa.
The British government’s handling of the issue ensured that my visit was a huge international media event. But that’s a story for another day. The lesson of all of this is that censorship should always be opposed.
“All censorships exist to prevent anyone from challenging current conceptions and existing institutions. All progress is initiated by challenging current conceptions, and executed by supplanting existing institutions. Consequently, the first condition of progress is the removal of censorship.”
― George Bernard Shaw
Twenty years ago this month the then Irish government Minister Michael D Higgins, with the support of his Taoiseach Albert Reynolds, announced the ending of Section 31.
Censorship in Britain was widespread throughout that period and was formalised in Thatcher’s broadcasting ban which was introduced in October 1988. This was eventually lifted on September 16tgh 1994.
January 28, 2014
Pete Seeger: singer, song writer, political activist, champion of the oppressed has died
.jpg)
Mise agus Toshi agus Pete
The great Pete Seeger has died. Seven months after the death of his wife Toshi he passed away on Monday evening at the age of 94 in a New York hospital. Fear maith é. Bro norm an sceal seo a fhail. In November 2009 I visited Pete and Toshi at their home in Beacon, in the Hudson River Valley in Upper New York State. In memory of a marvellous time I am posting extracts from the blog I posted following that visit and then Toshi’s death last July: “Regular readers will recall that this Blog was in the USA and Canada on one of those mad a-city-a-day schedule at the beginning of November. What you did not know was that in between all the other bits I got to meet with Pete Seeger and his wonderful wife Toshi. A mutual friend got me Pete’s contact details and I am eternally grateful to him for that.
When I was a teenager Pete Seeger was one of my heroes. He still is. He
was out there singing his songs and making music for workers and fighters
for civil rights, and women and disadvantaged people generally as I got interested in Irish and world politics. He is still at it at ninety one years of age.
Anyone who saw him on television with Bruce Springsteen and a gang of
other wonderful musicians at the Obama inauguration will have marvelled at the man’s energy and musicality. And he is still an activist. And an idealist.
So when he agreed to meet our small group we were delighted. He lives with Toshi in upstate New York in a forest. He and Toshi bought a bit of land there in 1949 and lived in a trailer before building a log cabin and after some time the house that they now live in. It is a very beautiful and quite isolated place.
When we arrived at the front door Pete was on his way out. He was pushing a wheelbarrow.
‘Here are our friends, all the way from Ireland’ he announced to Toshi, a
small cheery faced woman who was busy at the table in the big kitchen. She welcomed and shepherded us into the heat while her husband wheeled his barrow outside.
‘Pete was bringing in wooden blocks for the fire’ Toshi explained.
Soon we were gathered in a circle listening to Pete’s yarns. He is a natural story teller and within minutes he was singing for us to illustrate a point. His first songs were pop songs from the 1920’s and he sang a few bars to give us a flavour of that time.
‘Now here’s one an Irish plumber taught me forty years ago and he launched into Óró Sé Do Bheatha Bhaile.
‘Óró sé do bheatha bhaile. Oró sé do bheatha bhaile. Oró sé do bheatha baile. Anios ar theacht an tsamhraidh.’
This Blog is pleased to say that I sang close harmony on that one. Your man was green with envy. I was delighted with myself. Imagine Pete Seeger singing Oró Sé Do Bheatha Baile. With me !!!
And before we knew we were into Guantanamera and then If I Had A Hammer and Pete was talking about his parents and his grandparents and his Irish great granny and Woodie Guthrie, and The Weavers and Ireland and Tommy Makem and the Clancy Brothers and Tommy Sands and Bruce Springsteen and the Clean Up the Hudson campaign, all interspersed with songs and Toshi was making tea and keeping him right and we were greatly honoured to be with this great man and very wonderful woman.
Tinya, their daughter who runs a pottery in their basement joined us and
talked about Portadown and we went out and I collected acorns from around
their house and before we knew it was time to go again.
Pete gave me his new book WHERE HAVE ALL THE FLOWERS GONE? It’s terrific. Tons of songs, music, stories and a cd. Your man might just get it for Christmas. If he is good. Well if he is very, very good. It’s available through Sing Out Corporation. P.O Box 5460. PA 18015-0460. USA. ”
Following Toshi’s death I recalled her unique and spirit defence of the oppressed and her role of more than 70 years of organising Pete’s life and keeping him right: “Speaking after her death Pete described her as the ‘brains of the family’. ‘I’d get an idea and wouldn’t know how to make it work and she’d figure out how to make it work.’
In a biography of him in 1981 the author said of Toshi: ‘As Pete’s producer she made sure he was in the right place at the right time and in the right mood and knew where to go next. When problems arose she took the blame. At tax time when her shy singer couldn’t face how much money he earned – or worse, how much he gave the government for war – Toshi would place a blank page over the return when he signed it.’
Toshi produced his concerts, organised his schedule, helped found the Newport Folk Festival and made an Emmy award winning documentary about him.
She was fundamental to his life. But she also had a wicked sense of humour. One friend of the family recalls seeing an old cartoon on the wall. It’s of a woman answering the phone and she’s got a child under her arm and the phone in her hand and she’s doing the dishes and mopping the floor with her foot and the caption reads something like; ‘I’m sorry my husband can’t come to the phone right now. He’s out fighting for the rights of the oppressed.’
Our visit to their home in November 09 was a special moment.”
Pete Seeger’s influence on generations of musicians and political activists is immeasurable. He was blacklisted in the 1950’s McCarthy era; his music influenced Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen and scores of others; he wrote the civil rights anthem, ‘We Shall Overcome’ and hundreds of other memorable songs. Four years ago Springsteen introduced him at a Madison Square Garden concert as ‘a living archive of America’s music and conscience, a testament of the power of song and culture to nudge history along.’
I want to extend my condolences to Pete and Toshi’s son Daniel, daughters Mika and Tinya, their six grandchildren and one great grandson.
January 23, 2014
Make 2014 – the year of change
Two weeks ago citizens in the Irish state discovered, courtesy of the Sean O Rourke programme on RTE radio, that it was going to cost €180 million to establish Uisce Éireann – Irish Water.
This is a semi-state body whose remit is to take responsibility for water out of the hands of local councils, centralise control, and to introduce water charges for households. Like many others I also believe that the underlying agenda for the Irish government is the eventual privatisation of the water service.
Bad as this was the news that consultants were paid €85 million of the total outlay caused outrage. For 18 months Sinn Féin’s Environment spokesperson Brian Stanley and other Dáil TDs had been asking questions of the Minister for the Environment Phil Hogan about how much Irish Water was costing the taxpayer, and who was being paid what and how much? The Minister and his Deputy Minister Fergus O Dowd had refused to answer.
Within days of the story breaking it was also revealed that 299 Irish Water staff are to be paid significant bonus payments of up to €7,000 in breach of existing government guidelines. Two government Ministers attacked the move. But then media reports confirmed that the Department of the Environment and Department of Public Expenditure already knew of these plans.
Sinn Féin demanded that the Minister should go. He had deliberately withheld information that the public and their Dáil representatives had the right to receive. But it didn’t end there.
But Irish Water wasn’t the only agency where secret and shabby deals hit the spotlight. The Central Remedial Clinic, which provides support to disabled patients, many of them children. It had already emerged last November that the CRC was using money raised by its charity arm to top-up allowances to senior staff. Last year this amounted to €250,000. In December the CRC’s former chief executive – a former constituency worker for Fianna Fáil’s Bertie Ahern – told the Dáil Public Accounts Committee that he was given €200,000 when he left the organisation. This came from charitable donations.
Families who raise hundreds of thousands of euro each year to supplement the money the clinic receives from the Health Service were shocked, angry and some were heart broken and fearful that citizens would become sceptical about giving to a charity which was paying a significant amount of the charity money raised into the pockets of officials. Instead of the money raised by ‘Friends and Supporters of the CRC’ going to buy equipment, provide transport for disabled children or training for staff a huge chunk of it was used to pay off the chief executive.
All of this reached new heights of outrage when it was revealed that the former chief executive had actually received a severance package of €740,000. It is estimated that half of the one and a half million euro raised from charity work by CRC was used to pay top-ups and their former chief executive.
People were furious, incensed and angry. Here was evidence of cronyism at its worst; of money being taken off disabled children, of charities failing to regulate their business. The Taoiseach Enda Kenny bemoaned the scandal. It was he said, ‘indicative of a time’ which he hoped ‘was long gone in Irish politics.’ Who is he kidding?
Self-interest and greed are alive and well within the body politic in the Irish state. The Irish government has breached its own rules to pay more to its personal advisors. Ministers receive salaries that are the envy of their opposite numbers in other European states. The government has taken a succession of decisions since coming to power that have inflicted cuts and hardship on citizens, especially the elderly, the disabled and the vulnerable.
The CRC and Irish Water scandals are part of a toxic political culture, marked by 'jobs for the boys', contracts for a small group of consultants and insiders who are closely linked to the establishment.
It is part of a culture of greed and cronyism that came to dominance after partition and the defeat of the revolutionary fervour of 1916. It is the outworking of the coming to power of conservative right wing elements within Irish society. It is classic neo-colonialism. The colonial power leaves and is replaced by an indigenous elite that seeks to advance its own narrow interests. The Fine Gael and Fianna Fáil parties, occasionally supported by Labour or Greens, or when they existed the PDs, created and oversaw a culture of corruption and of golden circles involving bankers and developers and politicians who looked after each other to the detriment of ordinary citizens. These are the people who collapsed the Irish economy five years ago.
2014 – the Year of ChangeShould we despair? No. Is there an alternative to this toxic culture? I believe there is. It lies in the growth of a radical republican alternative. It is evidenced in the changing political landscape brought about across this island by the peace process and the growth of Sinn Féin.In the south the dominance of the two major parties has been broken. Fianna Fáil will never again be the political force it once was. Sinn Féin is now a major player in both jurisdictions on this island and with each passing day our membership numbers increase, we build our organisational capacity, and our policy development is evolving to meet the needs of Ireland today. Sinn Féin is for a realignment of Irish politics across the island.We believe that fairness and equality must be central to government policy.We are for core republican values which are about defending public services.
Sinn Féin believes that citizens have fundamental rights, including the right to a wrap-around health service; to a decent education free and accessible to third level; to a home; to a clean environment; to a fair wage and to a job.
Why should gender be the basis for the exclusion of anyone? Or disability? Why should race or class or skin colour or creed give one group of human beings the ability to deny other human beings their full rights or entitlements as citizens?
Society must be shaped around these rights. Society must be shaped around people – citizens – not elites or hierarchies.
In May there will be local and European elections in both parts of the island. Sinn Féin will be the only party contesting these in both parts of the island. We will have candidates standing in all of the European constituencies and for the first time since 1918 there will be Sinn Féin candidates in every local council on the island.There are 42 councils. There are eleven in the north and 31 in the south. Almost 300 candidates have been selected by Sinn Féin of whom 30% are women.
For those who want to look to a different, better future – who want hope for themselves and for their families – then the choice is obvious. In May make 2014 the year of change and vote for Sinn Féin candidates.
January 22, 2014
Government failing Charities
The refusal of the government parties to support Sinn Fein's Charities (Amendment) Bill in the Dáil this evening was deeply disappointing. The Bill sought to do what the government and its Fianna Fáil predecessor have failed to do and that is to regulate charities. By its action the government is failing charities at a very difficult time.The scandal over top-ups to salaries at the Central Remedial Clinic is evidence of cronyism at its worst. What is striking is that these elites believe that they are entitled to these huge payments. But what is also clear is that there is a toxic culture of bonuses, top-ups, bail-outs and dig-outs where there is always money for the elites and none for services that the charities were established to provide.Most importantly it is evidence of a failure by successive governments to legislate for charities.Below find my contribution to the Dáil debate.“Recent revelations surrounding the Central Remedial Clinic have raised significant public concern at the failure of the government to regulate charities.This has been compounded by the information provided last night by the Minister for Justice about the funding activities of the REHAB charity and the refusal of the Chief Executive of that organisation over some time to provide details of her salary.
In the case of the CRC funding raised by the Friends and Supporters of CRC was used to provide top-up allowances to senior staff. And all of this is now in the public consciousness.Last year this amounted to €250,000.
In December the CRC’s former chief executive told the Dáil Public Accounts Committee that he was given €200,000 when he left the organisation. This came from charitable donations.
And then it was revealed that he had actually received a severance package of €740,000. It is estimated that half of the one and a half million euro raised last year from charity work by CRC was used to pay top-ups and their former chief executive.
A friend of mine, Donnacha Rynne from Miltown Malbay in Clare is disabled.His mother wrote to the Irish Times this week.
She wrote:“I have been following the story of the CRC and the top-ups for its executives.
I am the mother of a severely disabled man who has been bed-bound for the past year partly because there is no money to purchase a new wheelchair for him. He is on an emergency listed for a wheelchair, but we are told that due to lack of funds he will have to wait.”Ceann Comhairle, families who have raised millions of euro over many years to supplement the money the clinic receives from the Health Service are shocked and angry at these revelations.
Many are upset at what they see as a breach of trust.They are especially fearful that citizens will become sceptical about giving money to a charity which used charity money to pay already well paid officials.
Ceann Comhairle this is evidence of cronyism at its worst. What is striking is that these elites believe that they are entitled to these huge payments.
But what is also clear is that there is a toxic culture of bonuses, top-ups, bail-outs and dig-outs where there is always money for the elites and none for services that the charities were established to provide.Most importantly it is evidence of a failure by successive governments to legislate for charities
In 2009 Fianna Fáil passed legislation to regulate the charities sector but then failed to implement it.This government also sat on this Act for three years.
In February 2012 my colleague Padraig Mac Lochlainn TD asked Minister Shatter why the government had not implemented the Act.He was told that it couldn’t be done because of financial and staffing resources and that the Act was deferred.
The Minister also claimed that ‘it is not the fact that the charities in Ireland are devoid of oversight.’
As we now know the oversight referred to by the Minister has been woefully inadequate.Ceann Comhairle the CRC scandal and the questions about REHAB are causing enormous public disquiet.
The CRC and Irish Water scandals are part of a toxic political culture, marked by 'jobs for the boys', golden circles and elites.This culture has to be tackled.
A starting point would be the speedy and full implementation of the Charities Act.The government’s approach will see regulation introduced in a piecemeal fashion over a long period of time.
While this takes place public confidence in charities will continue to erode.Charities will find it harder to raise money.
A recent survey found that one in five Charities were facing a 10% dip in their donations even before CRC scandal. Most charities believe public trust has now been lost and many believe that the damage may be permanent.
It was also widely agreed by over 80% of respondents that the Government has not done enough to implement the Charities Act 2009. Ceann Comhairle charities provide an invaluable service.
They are for the most part full of citizens who care deeply for those they seek to help.Their integrity, honesty and honour is on the line.
It is also of crucial importance to record that some of these charities would not be necessary if the state provided as it should the services these citizens are entitled to.Given that the government is continuing to cut public services the government clearly does not believe that they should have equality.
The state and the government have failed to provide this.
The least it can do is to provide the legislative framework in which charities can provide their services."
Gerry Adams's Blog
- Gerry Adams's profile
- 29 followers
Gerry Adams isn't a Goodreads Author
(yet),
but they
do have a blog,
so here are some recent posts imported from
their feed.
