Gerry Adams's Blog, page 62

The Smithwick Inquiry Report

Eight years after it was established the report of the Smithwick Tribunal was finally published on Tuesday evening.  

I want to commend Justice Smithwick for his hard work of many years. I am very mindful that at the heart of the Smithwick Inquiry there are two bereaved families and I hope the report helps bring some measure of closure for them.
I also want to commend the Irish government for fulfilling its obligation under the Weston Park Agreement. The onus is now on the British government to move speedily to holding the promised inquiry into the murder of human rights lawyer Pat Finucane.

The Smithwick Tribunal was established as a result of an agreement in the negotiations in Weston Park in 2001 between the British and Irish governments.
Canadian Judge Peter Cory was asked to look at the killing of Pat Finucane; Robert Hamill; Rosemary Nelson; Billy Wright; Judge Gibson and his wife; and RUC Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and RUC Superintendent Robert Buchanan.
Cory worked diligently and in 2003 he handed his reports over to the two governments. The Canadian Judge concluded that there was no basis for an inquiry into the deaths of the Gibsons. He proposed that there was a basis for inquiries into all of the others, including the killing of the two RUC officers.
The Irish government published Cory’s recommendations in December 2003 and announced that it would set up an inquiry, but the British stalled until April 2004 before publishing his reports to them.
Ten years later of the six cases investigated by Judge Cory only the Pat Finucane Inquiry has yet to commence. It is clear that the British government is deeply worried by the enormous political implications of the Finucane case which is known to involve substantial institutional collusion between British state forces and the UDA.
This concern was evident in the introduction by the British government in June 2005 of the Inquiries Act 2005. This legislation deliberately limits the scope of the inquiries proposed by Cory who criticised the British move saying it "...would make a meaningful inquiry impossible."
In June 2006 I met with Justice Smithwick at his request. He asked if I could help. I explained to him that in 2005 the IRA put its weapons beyond use and stood down its structures. The IRA had left the stage. However, after some effort three former IRA volunteers agreed to give evidence to the Tribunal.
A process was put in place to facilitate this. When this was achieved Sinn Féin stepped back and the process moved forward. This was a significant and unprecedented development. For the first time former members of the IRA gave evidence to an inquiry into an IRA action. Clearly this would not have been possible if the Tribunal had not created the context to allow it.  
The decision by three former members of the IRA to voluntarily give evidence to the Smithwick Tribunal was an important development. This was the first time former members of the IRA have ever given evidence to an inquiry into an IRA action. The engagement between the three former volunteers and Smithwick is historically unparalleled.

Justice Smithwick accepts much of the evidence given by the former IRA volunteers, for example describing their witness account as a ‘valuable resource for the Tribunal.’ At other points in his report he acknowledges that their evidence in respect of the movement of the RUC car is ‘fully consistent’ with information logged in the journal of RUC Superintendent Bob Buchanan.
Justice Smithwick’s conclusion is contradictory. On the one hand he concludes that the Tribunal ‘has not uncovered direct evidence of collusion’.
But then, in a clear contradiction of this and on the basis of circumstantial and untested intelligence Justice Smithwick then goes on to say that ‘on balance of probability’ some form of collusion occurred.

What Justice Smithwick defines as collusion is very different in form and scale from the collusion that occurred in the north. During 30 years of war the British state was responsible for structured, institutionalised and co-ordinated state run collusion and unionist death squads which led to the deaths of hundreds of citizens, including those killed in the Dublin and Monaghan and Dundalk bomb attacks.
The British government arrogantly disregards the unanimous all-party Oireachtas motion calling on it to provide vital information about these bomb attacks. The Pat Finucane Inquiry is now the only inquiry agreed to at Weston Park that has not been held.  The British government is in clear breach of its commitments.
The Irish government now needs to assertively lobby the British government, including at an international level, to honour its commitment and to set up the promised public inquiry into the murder of Pat Finucane.
Sinn Féin supported these inquires on the basis that families had the right to full disclosure of all relevant information. Sinn Féin believes that there needs to be an effective truth process for dealing with all legacy issues.

We have repeatedly called on the British and Irish governments to invite in a reputable and independent international body to establish an Independent International Truth Commission which would be independent of any state, combatant groups, political parties, civil society and economic interests and would have a remit to inquire into the extent and pattern of the conflict as well as their causes and consequences.
I helped to facilitate the engagement between the former IRA volunteers and the Smithwick Tribunal because I believe there is a responsibility to assist families bereaved in the conflict, though this may not be possible in all cases.
Republicans are very conscious of the hurt and suffering which has been caused through conflict in our country. Sinn Féin has repeatedly called on the British and Irish governments to invite in a reputable and independent international body to establish an Independent International Truth Commission which would be independent of any state, combatant groups, political parties, civil society and economic interests.
It should have a remit to inquire into the extent and pattern of past violations as well as their causes and consequences and would be dependent on the full co-operation of all the relevant parties.

 

Government decision on Symphysiotomy overdue

The decision by the government to appoint Judge Yvonne Murphy who will assist in finding closure for women who have been left traumatised, and physically and mentally scarred by the barbaric practice of symphysiotomy, is long overdue.
 The decision to provide a relatively short time frame of eight weeks for Judge Murphy to submit her report to the Minister for Health is useful provided the government doesn’t then delay in announcing what it intends to do. 

I am concerned that the terms of reference are not clear and as we know in these situations the devil is in the detail.  
The decision of the government to oppose the lifting of the Statue of Limitations to allow victims to take their cases to court – if that is their wish – is unacceptable. The victims of symphysiotomy should have the opportunity to choose which course of action is right for them and it is unfair of the government to prevent this. 
I am also troubled by the Minister’s continued refusal to publish the Walsh Report until after the government has decided what to do. In the interests of openness and to allow all of the women affected to decide on the best course of action for them it is necessary that the Walsh report is published. 
The use of symphysiotomy, the inconsistent and minimal application of known standards of care; the inadequate supervision of the clinicians who used the practice; the lack of attention patient’s rights; and the failure of successive government’s over many years to deal with this issue properly and to provide for those women on whom it was used, goes to the heart of the quality of healthcare in this state. Below is a PQ - Parliamentary Question that I submitted to the Minister for Health and his response on this issue.
QUESTION NO: 207
DÁIL QUESTION addressed to the Minister for Health (Dr. James Reilly)
by Deputy Gerry Adams
for WRITTEN ANSWER on 27/11/2013


* To ask the Minister for Health further to Parliamentary Questions in which he said that he expected to bring forward proposals on symphysiotomy to the Government, when these proposals will be brought forward; if the Government have decided how best to proceed in relation to this issue; when he will release the name of the judge he will appoint to meet with the women concerned to facilitate decisions on how best to bring closure to the issue; and the length of time he expects the mediation process to take.

Gerry Adams T.D.

Details Supplied: PQ's 444, 472, 476 & 486


REPLY.
I received the approval of the Government yesterday to appoint Judge Yvonne Murphy to assist in finding closure for women who have been affected by a symphysiotomy procedure. The Judge will work with key parties; including representatives of the women, the State Claims Agency and insurance companies in proposing a just outcome. Judge Murphy's work will take around eight weeks, at which time she will submit her independent report to me. I will then revert to Government with detailed proposals so that a decision can be taken as early as possible in the New Year. At that stage Prof Oonagh Walsh's Report will be published.

The Terms of Reference for the work of Judge Yvonne Murphy are:

1. To examine all relevant reports and information relating to symphysiotomy.
2. To meet women who have undergone surgical symphysiotomy procedures to assess what, in their opinion, would bring closure for them.

3. To assess, in conjunction with the State Claims Agency (SCA)and other relevant bodies, the relative liabilities of insurers, indemnifiers and/or other parties in relation to cases pending, or which may arise linked to surgical symphysiotomy procedures.

4. To meet insurers, indemnifiers and/or other parties in relation to such liabilities and to explore and negotiate a quantum representing a fair contribution towards a fund which would form part of an ex-gratia scheme to which Government would also contribute in order to establish an ex-gratia scheme and put closure on the issue for the women involved.

5. To assess the merits and cost to the State of proceeding with an ex-gratia scheme relative to allowing the court process to proceed.

6. To report to the Minister within a period of 8 working weeks on the outcome of these deliberations, with recommendations on the next steps.

I met representatives of the women yesterday with Judge Murphy to assure everyone that she will consult with all relevant parties in an environment where there are no preconceived ideas of what her conclusions might be. In this way her work will be truly independent.

My priority continues to be to ensure that the women who have had this procedure have their health needs comprehensively and professionally met. In this regard, the HSE provides a range of services to women who may be experiencing any adverse effects as a result of undergoing this procedure. These services include the provision of medical cards for the women, the availability of independent clinical advice and the organisation of individual pathways of care and the arrangement of appropriate follow-up. All these services are available on request by the women from the HSE nominated Symphysiotomy Liaison Officers.




 

The Sagart

  Clonard is a pFr. Alec Reid died in his sleep in the early hours of last Friday morning. I had been with him the previous Thursday and he was in good form. Talkative, funny and enjoying his hospital tea in St. Vincent’s in Dublin. But his condition deteriorated. I was phoned on Thursday night and told that he only had days. I arranged to travel down on Friday to visit him but shortly after 9am on Friday morning we got word that he had quietly passed in his sleep.  
I was deeply shocked and saddened at his death. For forty years I have known him as a good friend to me and my family, and a selfless and unstinting worker in the search for justice and peace. In the midst of hard times Fr. Reid was always there offering comfort and solidarity and advice.  
He was one of the good guys. His death is a huge loss to all the people of Ireland, to his fellow priests in the Redemptorist community and to his family, especially his sisters Margaret and Maura, his Aunt Ita, his wider family circle and his many friends.  
I first met Fr. Alec in the Cages of Long Kesh, where I was interned, in the mid 1970s. He and Father Des Wilson were pioneers of peace making in those difficult times. Both men were deeply committed to living the gospel message and to making it relevant to the particular circumstances in which they ministered. They developed dialogue with loyalists and facilitated meetings between us and some prominent people from loyalist paramilitarism. Both were tenacious peacemakers. 
I met him again on Easter Sunday after my release in 1976, when at my request he and Fr. Des – who thankfully is still with us - intervened to negotiate an end to the inter-republican feuds in Belfast. Theysucceeded in establishing an arbitration and mediation process between the different republican organisations.  
Fr. Alec had more freedom than most priests because he belonged to an order – the Congregation of the Most Holy Redeemer, popularly known as the Redemptorists – which fully supported the work he was doing. The Redemptorist mission is to ‘preach the values and the blessings of the Christian Gospel to people everywhere but particularly to the poor, the marginalised and the downtrodden’.
The Sagart was ordained in 1957and was appointed to Clonard Monastery several years later. From 1969 and throughout the intervening years of conflict Fr. Reid was constantly involved in a number of special peace-making ministries. The objective of these was to give comfort and support to the people living at the coal-face of the violence; helping prisoners and their families; and promoting understanding and reconciliation between the people of Belfast. He was also Chaplain to and worked closely with the Traveller community in Belfast.
Another Clonard ministry was to foster dialogue and friendship between the separated Christians of Belfast, an enterprise he took especially to heart, working tirelessly to move the conflict off the streets and onto the conference table. 
Fr. Alec was also a friend of the prisoners and part of the line of communication between them and the British Government during the first Hunger Strike in 1980. He actively encouraged initiatives in support of the H Block blanketmen and the Armagh women. It was Fr. Reid who suggested that we meet with Cardinal O Fiaich on the prison issue and it was Fr. Reid who persuaded the Cardinal to visit the republican political prisoners on the blanket protest in July 1978.  
Afterward the Cardinal, then Archbishop, O Fiaich, condemned the conditions under which the prisoners were being held, and said: “Having spent the whole of Sunday in the prison, I was shocked at the inhuman conditions prevailing in H-Blocks 3,4 and 5 where over 300 prisoners were incarcerated. One would hardly allow an animal to remain in such conditions, let alone a human being. The nearest approach to it that I have seen was the spectacle of hundreds of homeless people living in sewer pipes in the slums of Calcutta.” 
The Cardinal informed the then British Secretary of State, Humphrey Atkins, of these meetings and tried to mediate a resolution of the prison protest. It failed. The British were determined to break the prisoners. 
Fr. Reid was devastated by the commencement of the first hunger strike. He had lobbied ferociously for an end to the dispute. The stress of trying and failing to get a resolution of this issue took its toll and he took seriously ill. I used to visit Fr. Alex in Drogheda hospital. On one occasion Colette and I found him in a very distressed state as the health of the hunger strikers deteriorated. Paradoxically, while the plight of the prisoners and their families and the ongoing conflict continued to wear him down, he took great comfort from the messages of support that the blanket men had smuggled out to him.Some of his friends arranged to send him to Rome where the Redemptorist main headquarters is. Fr. Alec enjoyed Rome; he delighted in wandering through the city and eventually finding his way back to the Redemptorist House at nightfall. One day, on May 13th 1981, 8 days after Bobby Sands died on Hunger Strike, Fr. Alec was in St. Peter's square, reflecting on events in Ireland, the hunger strike and how different this was to Belfast with its daily bombing attacks and intermittent gun battles. As he tried to get closer to where the Holy Father, John Paul II’s procession was passing an armed man dashed forward close to the Sagart and shot the Pope.The Sagart, in a state of some understandable shock and concern for the Pope’s well being, made the mistake of recounting his experiences to friends back home. It was a story that was to be told and retold with suitable irreverence in typical black Belfast style for years after that.It wasn’t until July of the following year that the Sagart was allowed to return to Ireland but on condition that he didn't come north. His superiors were afraid that his fragile health could be undermined if he was allowed to become re-involved in his previous activities.When he eventually did we resumed our conversations about the conflict, its causes and how it might be ended. It was obvious that dialogue was the necessary first step. In the early 1980s we tried to commence a process of engagement with the Catholic Hierarchy, the SDLP, and the Irish and British governments. They were all rebuffed. The breakthrough came after Fr. Reid wrote a letter to John Hume on May 19 1986. John phoned the monastery the next day and he arrived at Clonard on May 21st. 
Towards the end of 1987 we decided that John and I would begin party-to-party meetings. The Sagart formally wrote to both of us as ‘an interested third party’ inviting Sinn Féin and the SDLP to ‘ explore whether there could be agreement on an overall nationalist strategy for justice and peace.’ He presented us with a paper entitled ‘A concrete proposal for an overall political strategy to establish justice and peace in Ireland.’ 
I brought the invitation to our Ard Chomhairle. It responded positively and John and I met on Monday January 11th 1988 for several hours. For the first time our meeting was publicised and there was an immediate and generally hostile response from the governments, the other political parties and sections of the media. Jump forward 25 years and it is the same sections of the media and in many cases the same journalists who are still busy peddling their anti-Sinn Féin agenda. 
Fr. Reid never allowed any of it to distract him. He was tenacious in his pursuit of peace. He wrote copious letters to political leaders here and in Britain and engaged in countless meetings with politicians and government’s seeking to persuade them to start the process of talking. He saw good in everyone and lived the gospel message. His was the gospel of the streets.  
He was there during the first hunger strike and became ill as a consequence of the stress. He was there during the battle of the funerals including the funerals of the IRA volunteers killed at Gibraltar. He was in Milltown Cemetery when the mourners were attacked. Three were killed and over 60 wounded. Several days later he administered the last rites to the two British soldiers killed at the subsequent funeral of one of the victims Caoimhin MacBradaigh.  
Fr. Reid also helped broker talks between Sinn Féin and Fianna Fáil and subsequently the Irish government and Sinn Féin. In 1999, at my request, he became involved in the ongoing efforts to locate the remains of those who had been killed and secretly buried by the IRA and others. After several years it became apparent that our initial hope that all of the remains would be located quickly was naive. He and I discussed this and consequently we put to the governments a proposal that experts in the recovery of remains, using high-tech equipment and archaeological methods should be employed.  
Later in 2005 he was an independent witness, along with Rev Harold Good, to the IRA putting its arms beyond use and during this time he was also involved in trying to develop a peace process in the Basque country. 
Today we brought him to his last resting place in the Redemptorist plot in Milltown cemetery. Earlier hundreds of his religious colleagues, political and community leaders and the people of west Belfast attended his funeral mass in Clonard.
The Sagart lived a full life. His contribution to peace in Ireland is immeasurable. There would not be a peace process at this time without his diligent doggedness and his refusal to give up. He remained through all these turbulent times a good and simple priest. He was forthright, funny and totally dedicated to upholding the dignity of human beings. He was an active proponent of equality, particularly of a woman’s right to equality. 
He was also a proud Tipperary man and a hurling enthusiast. His last words to me were “Up Tipp”. 
Go ndeanfaid Dia trocaire ar a n’anam dilse.  [image error]
 
 

The MRF - taking out unwanted members of the public

The BBC Panorama programme on the Military Reaction Force shines a light on the one aspect of Britain’s dirty war in Ireland. The existence of the MRF has been known for over 30 years but John Ware’s documentary usefully provides new information on a secret British Army unit that operated with impunity in the early 70s. The use of counter-gangs, like the MRF and the Force Reconnaissance Unit (FRU) and others; of agents and informers; and of specialist military units is as old as war itself. The British military establishment has long made use of these tactical tools. I am quite confident it is passing that experience on to its current crop of young officers in Sandhurst.

As used by successive British governments in Ireland this involved reshaping the judiciary, the law, the police and the media to suit the political and military objectives of the generals and the politicians. According to Frank Kitson the British Army’s foremost proponent of counter-insurgency tactics: ‘Everything done by a government and its agents in combating insurgency must be legitimate. But this does not mean that the government must work within exactly the same set of laws during an emergency as existed before hand. The law should be used as just another weapon in the government’s arsenal, in which case it becomes little more than a propaganda cover for the disposal of unwanted members of the public.’That was the job of the MRF. To kill unwanted members of the public. If unarmed republicans or civilians were killed that was acceptable.

In every major conflict in the 20th century and in the colonial struggles for independence – in Algeria and Vietnam, in Kenya and Mozambique, in Aden and Cyprus – the same strategies were employed. The court case taken by Kenyans who were imprisoned and tortured by the British Army in Kenya and which was covered extensively in the Guardian provides one example outside of Ireland of these practices at work.

It is a sad fact that the conflict in Ireland has left thousands of families bereaved and hurting. In the last month there have been anniversaries to mark the Enniskillen bomb, the Greysteel Massacre, the Shankill bomb and other similar events. There has also been the recent publication of ‘Lethal Allies’. Through a detailed examination of the facts this book connects British state forces with 120 deaths of civilians in a five year period in the 1970s. And it reveals the way in which the political and judicial system covered up these actions. This is what happens when politicians surrender their power to the generals. When diplomacy ends and war takes over and generals and their armies do what they have been trained to do, which is defeat the enemy.

I am an Irish republican. British government involvement in Irish affairs and the partition of my country are in my view at the core of the problem but I recognise that others, for example, the unionists, have a different view and their own sense of truth. There will be those in the British system who also have a different analysis. There are many differing narratives. Different perspectives on the causes of the conflict, what happened and who was responsible. All of these narratives have their own truth. There is no single voice for victims. Some want truth. Some want judicial processes. We need to set all of these narratives side by side and respect them all.The war is over. But the legacy of conflict remains with us. The pain from decades of conflict is, for many, as real today as it was when a loved one was killed.

US diplomats Richard Haass and Meghan O Sullivan are currently conducting intensive negotiations to deal with outstanding aspects of the Good Friday and other Agreements. These include the legacy issues. Everyone who has an interest in peace knows that the past cannot be allowed to be an obstacle to building the future. So, there needs to be a measured and inclusive debate on all of the issues involved.

Sinn Féin has proposed that an international, independent truth recovery process underpinned in legislation should be established. Others have different ideas of how this issue should be dealt with and that is fair enough, but we need to take this opportunity to move the process forward in a way that listens to, respects and treats all victims on the basis of equality, and also builds the future for the survivors.
 

Unshackling the Past

US diplomats Richard Haass and Meghan O Sullivan are currently conducting intensive and inclusive negotiations to deal with outstanding aspects of the Good Friday and other Agreements. These include the legacy issues arising from the conflict.

Everyone who has an interest in building the peace knows that the past cannot be allowed to be an obstacle to building the future. So, there needs to be a measured and inclusive debate on all of the issues involved.Today the north’s Attorney General John Larkin has put forward his ideas on dealing with one aspect the legacy of the past - the issue of prosecutions. He has expressed a view that there should be no prosecutions, inquests or inquiries for incidents before the Good Friday Agreement.

Mr. Larkin has also said that the current position favours non-state forces. That is not the case. The British government is in breach of international agreements and commitments in respect of the Pat Finucane Inquiry and the Dublin and Monaghan bombs. And to all intents and purposes there is an amnesty for the British state forces and their allies. While over the years thousands of republicans and innocent nationalists have served very lengthy prison sentences.I have not had the chance to read the Attorney General’s full remarks on this issue. But I think it is a good thing that the Haass talks have encouraged people - he has had several hundred submissions – to express their opinions, including victims.

Our wider society needs to have this debate. We need a sensitive, measured, reasoned and intelligent debate on these issues which recognises that any mechanism put in place must be victim centred and that it has to be done on the basis of equality.The conflict is over but the legacy of conflict remains with us. The pain, suffering and the tragedies from decades of conflict are, for many, as real today as they were when they first occurred.

Sinn Féin believes that if legacy issues are located in the framework of conflict resolution and of the broader peace process then these matters will be addressed in way which will heal divisions, consolidate the peace and become guarantors for the future. Truth recovery and acknowledgement are critical to dealing with the past and can become a powerful dynamic in the quest for reconciliation.

Sinn Féin has proposed that an international, independent truth recovery process underpinned in legislation should be established. Others have different ideas of how this issue should be dealt with and that is fair enough, but we need to take this opportunity to move the process forward in a way that looks after the victims but also builds the future for the survivors.
It is necessary that in coming to the issue of truth and reconciliation that we all recognise that there are many different narratives to this story. All of these narratives have their own truth. There is no single voice for victims. Some want truth. Some want judicial processes. There are also different perspectives on the causes of the conflict, what happened and who was responsible.

I am an Irish republican. British government involvement in Irish affairs and the partition of this country are in my view at the core of the problem but I recognise that others, for example, the unionists have a different view and their own sense of truth, Fine Gael may have its own analysis. Or Fianna Fáil and others including the British government. We need to set all of these narratives side by side and respect them all.
How do we encourage such a debate? The starting point must be a recognition by the Irish government that this is a crucial matter and that as a co-equal partner with the British government it has a responsibility to look after everyone on this island including our unionist neighbours.
In this context I am looking to the government to encourage a joined-up inclusive, thoughtful discussion aimed at unshackling us from the past. We need a process that can ensure that the past is never repeated and which is aimed at forging a more hopeful future for the people who have survived the conflict and for our children and grandchildren.
In this respect I am very conscious of the upcoming state visit by the President to Britain. It is important that these seismic changes can be measured by people not just in the palaces but also in the laneways and hillsides across this island.
Finally in our submission to the Haass talks Sinn Féin submitted a paper ‘Addressing Legacy Issues – Building a Common Future’. We have also made submissions on Flags and emblems and on parades. All of these are available at www.sinnfein.ie

The Troika may be leaving but the mind-set remains

Yesterday the Minister for Finance Michael Noonan told the Finance Committee in the Dáil that the issue of a decision on whether or not the state needed a precautionary credit line following its exit from the bailout was not on the agenda of today’s meeting of Eurozone finance ministers in Brussels.

This morning an emergency Cabinet meeting was called and the Dáil was given less than an hour to respond to an unspecified statement from the government. Was it going for ‘backstop’, a post-bailout credit line, or was it not? The media was well briefed. The government spin doctors had done their work and had the line before the Taoiseach stood up in the Dáil and told members.

It was all good political theatre. The government constructed a dramatic announcement for its decision to set aside the option of a post bailout credit line. Its PR spin is obvious. It’s all about the government patting itself on the back and claiming that it has regained economic sovereignty and brought an end to the rule of the Troika.

But the truth is much different. It was bounced on the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste by their master in Europe. The government has no strategic plan, stumbles from crisis to crisis and has no long term vision – except that is to impose more austerity policies on a financially exhausted and exasperated citizenry.

The truth is that while the Troika may be leaving, the Troika mind-set remains. The government has over its two and a half years in office slavishly followed the policies of the last Fianna Fáil government and has embraced austerity. It has even gone as far as introducing austerity measures that were not recommended by the Troika.
It has taxed and cut the most vulnerable in Irish society, unbidden by its European masters. It has very specifically and unfairly targeted young unemployed citizens, the elderly, working mothers and those in need of medical cards.
These citizens are being made to carry the can for the economic collapse and the recklessness of bankers, developers and politicians. That is patently unfair.In the government’s October’s 2014 budget older citizens have been particularly hard hit with cuts to the telephone allowance; the loss of the bereavement grant; the withdrawal of medical cards and cuts to the invalidity pension. That is unfair.As a result of this and last year’s budget, older citizens will have lost €22.60 per month in the telephone allowance. That is particularly mean-spirited.The Budget also saw Maternity Benefit cut for the second year in a row. This will adversely affect 90% of women in receipt of Maternity Benefit. Cutting Maternity Benefit is contrary to the interests of women, of children and indeed of Irish society. It is also unfair.

What is equally unfair is the fact that Fine Gael and Labour, just like Fianna Fáil before them, have embraced forced emigration as a policy choice. Already there are 1,700 people emigrating from this state every week. The vast majority of these are young, educated citizens, unable to get suitable employment.This morning’s announcement makes no positive difference to them or their families and the government’s determination to pursue austerity coupled with its inadequate Youth Guarantee Scheme means that more of our young people will continue to leave for the hope of jobs abroad.

Next year, whether the Troika is here or not, the government will take €2 billion more from the economy in water charges, taxes and more cuts to health, education and other vital services. On top of that, citizens in this state still subject to the terms of the fiscal treaty, which this government and Fianna Fail pushed the people to support. For many more years, the Irish people will be forced to carry an unsustainable debt burden, inflicted on us because of the austerity policy Fine Gael, Labour and Fianna Fail embraced to bail out the banks. The reality is that the government has secured nothing to relieve citizens of this odious debt. 17 months ago the Taoiseach and the Tánaiste were proclaiming their achievements at the June 2012 Euro summit. They claimed it was a game changer a seismic shift. Having pumped €65 billion of taxpayers money into bad and toxic banks it was claimed that the European Stability Mechanism would reduce banking debt, separate banking debt from sovereign debt and that it would be retrospective and we would get some of our money back.None of this has happened. If we are to begin to regain our economic sovereignty, it will not be under this government. Nor will not be under Fianna Fáil. This government should go. The only way to rebuild the economy is to make deficit adjustments that are fair and growth friendly. The economy must be stimulated and jobs created if recovery is to be sustainable. The banking debt is a noose around the neck of the people. It must be restructured and reduced. We are leaving the bailout programme but we cannot get away from the legacy and the damage caused by austerity. Our public services are decimated and families across the state are in poverty. The government and especially the Labour party should be ashamed of this.

Demanding the right to collective bargaining

Last Friday I attended an event in New York to celebrate the hard work, diligence and activism of 100 Irish American trade union activists. It was a very special occasion. It was held in the Sheraton Hotel on seventh avenue where the night before almost 800 people took part in the annual Friends of Sinn Féin annual fundraising dinner.
 The Labour event was also a celebration of the centenary of the Dublin Lockout of 1913 which many trade union leaders in the USA acknowledge was a pivotal moment in the development of the world-wide trade union movement. The Dublin Lockout involved about 20,000 workers who went on strike for recognition; better conditions and pay. It was a long and bitter battle against tyrannical bosses.

One result of the Lockout was the founding 100 years ago this month of the Irish Citizen Army to defend workers and promote workers rights. Three years later in seeking to advance those goals the Citizen Army played a key role in the Easter Rising against British Imperialism.
The lockout also saw women trade unionists take a leading role in defense of workers. Women like Louie Bennett who formed the Irish Women’s Reform League and Delia Larkin who founded the Irish Women Workers’ Union.
Workers in Ireland were not alone in battling for better conditions and wages. 100 years ago all around the world workers were coming together in trade unions and workers collectives.

The same year of the Dublin Lockout, the USA experienced its first general strike when 50,000 silk workers in Patterson, New Jersey struck for five months in order to win shorter working hours and better conditions. And while the starving workers returned to work without winning all their demands, their protests continued until in 1919 when they finally secured an eight-hour day.
Many Irish workers who fled hunger and poverty, injustice and political repression came to play a vital role in the trade union movement in the United States. Among these was the inspirational figure of James Connolly. He spent 7 years of his life in the USA where he helped establish and organise the Independent Workers of the World. Connolly also understood the importance of freedom from Britain and its linkage to the rights and freedoms and future prosperity of workers.
We are proud of James Connolly. We are proud of his record in defense of American Labour. We are also proud of the role James Connolly played in the fight for Irish freedom. In 1914 Connolly wrote that the damage the partition of Ireland would bring, especially in respect of workers rights would be ‘disastrous’. He warned that: “All hopes of uniting the workers, irrespective of religion or old political battle cries will be shattered.”
The history of the last 100 years is evidence of the truth of Connolly’s words. Partition created two conservative states in Ireland. It stunted the economic, social and political potential of this island. It divided worker against worker north and south, and strengthened sectarian divisions within the north. It is that legacy that this generation of Irish republicans is determined to resolve.
Significant progress has been made since the Good Friday Agreement was achieved 15 years ago. But more needs to be done. The Good Friday Agreement cannot become a mechanism for managing division. It has to be an accord which sign posts a journey to equality, fairness and prosperity.
In my conversations with American trade union leaders it was clear that we and they share our opposition to the policies of austerity.
In the north and despite having no mandate, the British government has imposed cuts which have seriously undermined the Executive’s ability to provide an economic and peace dividend.
In the south the determination of Fine Gael and Labour to stick to austerity is causing enormous difficulties for families. Some 415,000 people or 14% are on the live register while 300,000, mainly young people, have emigrated in the last four years. 1700 are fleeing the state every week. They have gone to Canada and Australia and to the USA.
It is a shameful indictment of successive Irish governments that citizens have no expectation that a young person can be born, grow up, live, work, prosper and grow old in the land of their birth.
It is also an indictment of successive Irish governments and of the leadership of the Labour movement that 100 years after the lockout the Irish state is only one of three EU member states in which workers have no legislated right to workplace representation –no right to negotiate the terms and conditions of their employment.
Workers have no right to have their union recognised by their employer and have no right to collective bargaining. And while the slum conditions of 100 years ago may not be the conditions of today it is a fact that the gap between the rich and the poor is greater now than then. Inequality is as grave an issue today as it was 100 years ago.
Austerity condemns one in ten children to consistent poverty with 47% of households living on less than €100 a month after bills.
It is a truism that there are employers who do not believe in wasting a good recession. For right wing elites a recession is an opportunity to drive down wages; sack workers; hire others at cheaper rates; cut overtime payments; demand longer hours for less, and ignore the trade unions.
If there is to be a lasting legacy out of the 1913 Dublin Lockout it must be the right of workers to choose their own representatives and have them bargain collectively on their behalf. That means increasing pressure on the government to legislate for this.
It also means building alliances on social and economic matters with others in Ireland and abroad, who share our opposition to austerity.
It means getting back to activism; to organising, to campaigning, to recruiting, to agitating for the rights of workers, including unemployed workers, the poor and demonstrating across all employment sectors.
The vast majority of people want a society that is based on values of social justice, fairness, equality and decency. I firmly believe that this can be achieved if we work together.
 

The past cannot be an obstacle to the future

Friday - November 8th was the anniversary of the 1987 Enniskillen bomb attack in which 11 people were killed in an IRA bomb attack. Just before I left Belfast to travel to the USA I was interviewed for a documentary on the Ballymurphy Massacre in August 1971 in which 11 people were killed by the British Parachute Regiment.

Last week also saw the broadcasting of the Disappeared and details emerged of British Army tapes which may have filmed the sectarian killing by the UVF of 76 year old Roseanne Mallon in county Tyrone in May 1994. The inquest into Roseanne Mallon’s death is one of 29 which have been deliberately delayed for decades.

There were also the anniversaries of the Shankill Bomb and the Greysteel Massacre and other killings. The Pat Finucane Centre’s case worker Anne Cadwallader published her book, ‘Lethal Allies: British State Collusion in Ireland’ which details the involvement of British state forces operating in collusion in the murder of approximately 120 citizens in the 1970s. And there are many more families who have lost loved ones in other violent actions seeking truth.

The pain, the suffering and the tragedies from decades of conflict are, for many, as real today as they were, when they first occurred.   Each occasion of anniversary evokes painful memories. And each such occasion is a reminder of the need to address the past as part of the work of building a peaceful future.

Almost 4000 people died and countless others were injured in a war that was vicious and brutal. Over the years I have attended many wakes and funerals of family members, friends and neighbours. I have met many victims, including victims of the IRA, and among them the families of those secretly buried by that organisation. Their story is one of the great tragedies of the conflict. What happened was wrong and unjustifiable. The IRA acknowledged this and apologised.

The grief of all of the victims of the conflict must be respected and acknowledged and all of us in political leadership have a responsibility to do all that we can to ensure that no future generation suffers the pain of war.

Regrettably, there are some in the political system and in sections of the media who see the issue of the past as an opportunity to attack Sinn Féin or more particularly me. An example of this occurred in the Dáil last Tuesday. A Fianna Fail TD Brendan Smith, speaking on the issue of those secretly buried by the IRA, that: “The IRA still refuse to accept responsibility for the murders and legitimate questions are not answered by Gerry Adams and others.”

None of this is true. The Fianna Fail leader Micheál Martin knows this. He was a senior member of the government which established the Commission for the Location of Victims Remains at my request.

As a republican leader I have never shirked my responsibility on this issue. It was following representations by me that the IRA established a special unit in the autumn of 1997 to ascertain the whereabouts of the graves of a number of people executed and buried by it in the 1970’s. I have met the families of those affected by this. I have worked with the Commission and I will continue to do so. It has done tremendous work.

I participated in the programme to raise awareness and assist the search for the remaining bodies. That has been my focus for many years and I intend to honour the commitment I gave to the families to continue with my efforts.

The special forensics team, working to the Independent Commission for the Location of Victims Remains, was established as a result of a proposal from Father Alec Reid and myself.

The forensic science consultant Geoff Knupfer, who leads the forensic team for the Commission, acknowledged several years ago the co-operation they received from the IRA. He said: "In a spirit of co-operation and reconciliation they [the IRA] are trying to help in every way they can. I am absolutely convinced that they are doing everything they can to assist. The support we have had from them has been absolutely 100 per cent from day one."

As a result of the work of the last 12 years nine bodies have been recovered and the sites of four of the six remaining bodies have been identified. The failure thus far to find the remaining bodies is not due to any lack of resolve or cooperation by me or other republicans.

Ranting about me is easy for those who rely on gossip, smear, their own imagination and the accusations of political enemies, but it will not help the families. Nor will resolving this injustice and recovering the bodies be assisted by political point scoring, felon setting or snide ill-informed newspaper articles. What is needed is information.  

I therefore appeal again for anyone with any information, including anyone who was previously in touch with the Commission to contact them again on the basis of absolute confidentiality, in order to assist the Commission in reassessing the information available to it.

Any information passed to the Commission cannot be used in a court of law or transmitted to any other agency and those passing on this information have absolute immunity in relation to this information.

Unfortunately the issue of the past, and of truth and reconciliation has not made the progress it should have since the Good Friday Agreement was achieved.

Sinn Féin has proposed an independent international based process to deal with the past including all these issues. The fact is that none of the participants to the conflict can be responsible for creating such a process. However, thus far the British government refuses to agree on any mechanism that can deal with this issue and the Irish government and others have made no real effort to establish a viable truth recovery process. This is not acceptable.

The past cannot be an obstacle to dealing with the present or a pretext for refusing to build a new future of equality, fairness and prosperity for everyone. And while republicans recognise the complexity and difficulties which confront us all in dealing with this issue we are in no way daunted by it.  Nor should anyone be.

It is necessary that in coming to the issue of truth and reconciliation that we all recognise that there are many different narratives to this story. We live in a divided and largely segregated society with different, and, in some instances, contradictory and opposite political allegiances. Little wonder that there are different perspectives on the causes of the  conflict, what happened and who was responsible.

The role and actions of all combatant organisations must be fully considered, including government, state agencies and the legal and judicial system.
And paramount in all of this must be the views of the victims and survivors. Their voices must be heard and respected, not simply the loudest voices, not simply those on any particular side or those on no side. All victims must be treated on an equal basis. The views of the many thousand victims and survivors who have remained silent must also be heard.   
So despite the personalised attacks  on me Sinn Fein  will not be deflected from campaigning for  a truth and reconciliation process that can bring closure for families bereaved by the cruelty of war.
 

Lethal Allies by Anne Cadwallader

Collusion: Getting rid of unwanted members of the public Lethal Allies by Anne CadwalladerThe use of collusion by the British state in the north of Ireland is a well-established fact.  The historical connection between unionist paramilitarism, the RUC and B Specials made it easy for the British. The northern state was born out of partition and the use and threat of violence by unionist political leaders. Many of those who founded the RUC and the various armed Special Police Groups, including the B Specials, which existed then were former members of the UVF (Ulster Volunteer Force) – an armed paramilitary organisation.
When the British Army came back onto the streets of Derry and Belfast in 1969 many of its officers and soldiers were fresh from the killing fields of Aden and Oman and some had served in Kenya and Cyprus and Malaya during the years of conflict in those places in the 1950s and early 60’s.
They brought with them the techniques of torture; of counter-gangs; of propaganda, and media and political manipulation that they had used there. Foremost among its advocates was Frank Kitson. He argued that to win against a guerrilla enemy which had the support of its community or at the very least a significant proportion of its community, the government, the law, the judiciary and the media all had to be reshaped and moulded to suit the aim of defeating the enemy.   Kitson wrote: ‘The fundamental concept is the working of the triumvirate, civil, military and police, as a joint and integrated organisation from the highest to the lowest level of policy making, planning and administration.’ Kitson rationalised the use of death squads and the corruption of justice: ‘Everything done by a government and its agents in combating insurgency must be legitimate. But this does not mean that the government must work within exactly the same set of laws during an emergency as existed beforehand. The law should be used as just another weapon in the government’s arsenal, in which case it becomes little more than a propaganda cover for the disposal of unwanted members of the public.’   What did all of this mean in practice? In the early years of the ‘troubles’ it meant the British Army forging a new unionist paramilitary organisation – the Ulster Defence Association – out of many small neighbourhood groups. It meant watching columns of masked UDA men in their thousands parade in paramilitary uniform through the streets of Belfast escorted by the RUC and British Army. It meant an increase in sectarian killings.   The purpose of this was to frighten the nationalist community into rejecting the IRA; to drag that organisation into a sectarian war; and to make it easier for the British to present the conflict internationally as ‘mindless sectarian criminality’. It also allowed for the state to dispose of ‘unwanted members of the public.’   The history of those early years is writ large the use of spies and spooks and counter gangs by the British through organisations like the Military Reaction Force and the RUC Special Branch. Later additional forces like the Force Research Unit and the Special Air Service and others were brought to play by the Brits.  Successive British government’s rejected the accusation of collusion. With some honourable exceptions most media acquiesced to this. Unionists politicians then and today still deny its existence despite the abundance of evidence.

In 2006 an Independent International Panel on Collusion into Sectarian Killings produced a detailed 109-page report. It followed a careful examination of 25 cases of unionist paramilitary violence between 1972 and 1977 in which 76 people were killed. The Panel found that in 24 cases involving 74 killings there was evidence of collusion involving the RUC and Ulster Defence Regiment.

Launching the report Douglas Cassel, a human rights professor from the American University of Notre Dame, said he had been shocked at the extent of state collusion in the killings the team had investigated.

The following year the then Police Ombudsman Nuala O Loan published a report detailing how the RUC Special Branch knowingly colluded with a “serial killer” – Mark Haddock – providing him with cover, protecting him from prosecution and paying him at least £80,000 for his services as an agent. Special Branch agents operated outside the law and Special Branch officers covered up their crimes. The investigation directly linked Haddock with the murders of ten people and cites credible evidence to link him with further murders, shootings, beatings and bomb attacks as well as a catalogue of other crimes including drug dealing, extortion, intimidation and criminal damage. Throughout it all, Haddock enjoyed the full support of his Special Branch handlers who not only continued to pay him but also increased his wages. The report found a ‘pattern of work by certain officers within Special Branch designed to ensure that Informant 1 and his associates were protected from the law’. And then there is the case of human rights lawyer Pat Finucane about which I have written many times before. The British are so concerned by the potential of this one case to expose the lie that collusion was not an instrument of institutional and official government policy that they reneged on a commitment at Weston Park in 2001 to hold an enquiry. But the issue of collusion will not disappear. It has left behind too many victims, their families and questions unanswered. And now truth has a new champion with the publication of ‘Lethal Allies – British collusion in Ireland’ by Anne Cadwallader. Anne who is a case worker with the Pat Finucane Centre has spent three years researching the deaths of 120 citizens who were killed between 1972 and 1978. ‘Lethal Allies’ chronicles the extent of collusion between unionist paramilitaries and the RUC and UDR in that six year period in the 1970’s and it provides a significant new body of information and evidence about the extent of collusion at that time.   It contains significant new evidence relating to 120 sectarian killings, including the Dublin and Monaghan bombs which claimed 33 lives, that occurred during a relatively short period in the 1970s. The reports from the Historical Enquiries Team, which have never been seen before, provide a significant insight into the role of the RUC and UDR in sectarian killings.   The Pat Finucane centre has also added substantial new evidence through its careful research in the files available in the British national archives in Kew Gardens in London and elsewhere and extensive interviews with victim’s families have also produced new information.   The book makes difficult reading. Page after page records the death of a loved one and the brutal circumstances in which their lives were taken. But page after page also reports the depth of RUC and UDR direct and indirect involvement in most of these deaths.   There are many cases that stand out. But the bomb attack on the Rock Bar, Granemore, in mid Armagh, provides one of the clearest examples of collusion at work. Late on June 5 1976 three men wearing masks pulled up in a car outside of it. They shot one man and seriously wounded one man Michael McGrath who was standing outside. They placed a bomb outside and fired indiscriminately into the building. Only the detonator exploded and no one else was injured.   All of those involved in this attack were serving members of the RUC. ‘Lethal Allies’ methodically strips away the connections in this and in case after case and reveals the extent of RUC and UDR involvement all of these murders.   But it goes further than that it also exposes the degree to which the institutions of the state, including the DPP and the judiciary colluded in the covering up and shielding of those involved in these actions. When the three RUC officers were eventually arrested and brought to court, along with several others, the serious charge of attempted murder relating to the Rock Bar attack were dropped.  Michael McGrath was not called as a witness nor were any of the other people in the Rock Bar. Two of the three were given suspended sentences and the third, Constable William McCaughey, who had been convicted several weeks earlier of the sectarian murder of William Strathearn, was sentenced to seven years to run concurrently with his conviction for the killing of Strathearn.   The Lord Chief Justice Lowry tellingly remarked: ‘All of the accused have admitted their offences and all of them have acted wrongly or emotionally under the same powerful motives, in one case the mortal danger of their service and in the other the feeling that more than ordinary police work was needed and justified to rid the land of the pestilence which has been in existence.’  In the days since the book has been published a succession of unionist politicians and former RUC officers have denied, denied, denied. There is no surprise in this. Anne Cadwallader records in her book that when Harvard historian Caroline Elkins reported on events in Kenya the British first denied that any abuses had taken place then ‘when presented with the evidence, blamed the beatings, hangings, torture and forced removals on “bad apples”.’
‘Duplicity at its finest,’ she called it. That phrase of ‘bad apples’ and others like ‘renegade officers’ have been used often in the past. It was trotted out to excuse the torture of detainees in Castlereagh and Gough Barracks and Strand Road in the late 1970s. It is being used again in recent days. Once more it is about trying to distance the British political system from any complicity in what occurred. However, the extent of collusion and its cover-up; the fact that British politicians knew of its existence and did nothing to prevent it and the refusal to hold the Pat Finucane enquiry are all evidence of collusion. This is perhaps best summed up by Anne Cadwallader in her conclusion. She writes, “The inescapable fact, established beyond doubt by these events, is 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.” In October 2011 the then British Secretary of State Owen Patterson stood in the British Parliament and admitted that the British State colluded with Loyalist gunmen in Pat’s murder. On the same day David Cameron told the Finucane family that there would be no inquiry into Pat Finucane’s death just a review of the papers. Patterson’s words were part of a damage limitation exercise. The British hoped it would silence the Finucane family. It didn’t work. Moreover a British Minister, on behalf of the British Prime Minister, was admitting that his predecessors had participated in a criminal action. The British government should move immediately to establish the inquiry into the Pat Finucane killing which it signed up for at Weston Park and has reneged on. And it should engage positively in the debate around truth, legacy and reconciliation matters which thus far it has obstructed and frustrated.

acceptable behaviour?

Last week the Finucane family buried their mother Kathleen. She died without the closure on the murder of her son, human rights lawyer Pat Finucane that had been promised by the British and Irish governments at Weston Park in 2001.

That commitment was reneged on by the British government. It is not their only broken commitment. 15 years after the Good Friday Agreement there is no Bill of Rights for the north; there is no Acht na Gaeilge; and there is no north-south consultative forum. There is opposition to change from within elements of the British system – from those don’t like the peace process and the fact that they failed to defeat Irish republicanism. The growing strength of Sinn Féin across the island is their worst nightmare.

There is also opposition to change from within political unionism. The northern state was built on discrimination, sectarianism and segregation in order to maintain unionist domination. For nationalists the north was an apartheid state. But it has also been bad for unionists locking them into a political cul-de-sac in which working class loyalist communities face huge problems of poverty, disadvantage and criminality.

Recently in parts of Belfast we have seen the most naked sectarian elements of unionism stirred up for short term political purpose. There has been months of organised sectarian violence on the streets of Belfast as the Orange Card has been played again. The Orange Order in alliance with the UVF and the PUP has been deliberately stoking up tensions. The DUP and UUP leaderships have allowed these organisations to set a violent sectarian agenda. And unionist leaders have failed to stand up to this at the time when decisive positive leadership may have made a real difference.

In stark contrast when so-called dissidents killed PSNI officers and British soldiers Martin McGuinness stood shoulder to shoulder with Peter Robinson and the Chief Constable to condemn those actions in assertive, clear and robust language. There was no equivocation by Martin. No delay. He showed leadership.
That’s what is missing from within political unionism. Positive leadership to build the political process; to take a stand against illegal marches, sectarianism and violence, and the provocative actions of the Orange Order in Belfast.
I retain the hope that such a leadership will develop. In this spirit I very much welcomed Peter Robinson’s remarks last Thursday night at a Co-Operation Ireland dinner, organised to acknowledge the efforts of the GAA to forge better community relations.  Peter Robinson expressed the need for respect. I agree with him completely. The GAA has indeed played a very significant role in encouraging better community relations. One thing that most sportspeople have for their rivals is respect. Politicians could learn a lot from that ethos.Notwithstanding the expertise and standing of Richard Haass and Megan O Sullivan they would be the first to acknowledge that the only people who can resolve these issues are the people who live in the communities affected and their leaders.



The first question to be asked therefore is: what is acceptable behaviour?Is it acceptable that there can be public displays and in some cases saturation of public thoroughfares, of flags or emblems of illegal organisations responsible for killing hundreds of people, mostly because they were Catholic?

Is it acceptable that places of worship are targeted? That there are regular incitements to hatred? Is it acceptable that the union flag is used in an offensive way? I would certainly wholeheartedly condemn the use of the Irish national flag if it is used in any disrespectful or offensive way.

Is it acceptable that young people are actively encouraged to hate their neighbours on the basis of their religion?

Is it acceptable that there should be a tolerance of gangs engaged in criminality because they masquerade as either loyalist or republican?

I believe it is not. I believe that it is contrary to the wishes of the vast majority of people. I also believe it is unlawful. Citizens of Dublin or London or New York would not have to endure that which is foisted on the citizens of Belfast and other places, and defended or tolerated by some political leaders.Sinn Féin holds out the hand of friendship to unionists, including the Orange, and former unionist paramilitaries. We do so on the basis of equality and partnership.

Solutions are needed to resolve these difficult issues of symbols, marches and the past. But this will only be done if leaders lead.