Cuirim fáilte roimh an deis seo. I apologise to the Minister for being for missing some of his speech and also apologise to the House that I have to leave immediately after my own because this debate is clashing with a meeting of the Oireachtas justice committee. That affects a number of Members. I ask the Minister to engage with his officials to try to ensure that justice debates in future will not clash with meetings of the committee because a number of members of the committee would like to be here for the duration of the debate. The purpose of this Bill is, as the Minister has outlined, to provide a specific legal mechanism for the taking of oral testimony before a High Court judge in this jurisdiction for the purpose of the Omagh bombing inquiry. That Omagh bombing inquiry was established by the northern Secretary of State in February 2024 to investigate whether the bombing in the town of Omagh, County Tyrone, on 15 August 1998 could have been prevented. The Irish Government made commitments to assist with the inquiry and this Bill is to facilitate this assistance. Sinn Féin fully supports this co-operation. Last year, the inquiry heard four weeks of what could only be described as heart-breaking testimony from the victims and survivors of the Omagh bombing. It was important to do that at the very beginning of the inquiry, in my view. Sinn Féin had supported the demand of the families of the victims of the 1998 Omagh bombing for a cross-Border public inquiry. The families, who have campaigned for 27 years for that inquiry, deserve full transparency and full disclosure about the events that led to the killing of their loved ones. The Government declined to establish a parallel independent inquiry in this jurisdiction, something a number of the families had been calling for, but in the absence of that, the fullest co-operation possible with the existing inquiry is needed. The Bill allows the Irish authorities to take sworn evidence from Garda members, Defence Forces personnel, civil servants and former Ministers to support the Omagh bombing inquiry. It sets procedures for requesting, giving and protecting such evidence, provides judicial oversight and amends existing international co-operation law to facilitate the process. The mechanism provided for in the Bill is modelled on that contained in section 3 of the Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Act 2019 for the taking of oral testimony from members of An Garda Síochána for the purposes of Troubles-related inquests and this legislation follows on from a memorandum of understanding that was agreed in April 2025. Under the Bill, any provision of oral sworn evidence to the inquiry by former members of An Garda Síochána, former members of the Defence Forces, former Ministers and former officeholders of Departments of State will be done on a voluntary basis, and there are some concerns regarding the voluntary nature of this evidence and how that might work in practice. Concerns have also been raised that national security limits could restrict disclosure because governments, and particularly that of our nearest neighbours, often protect intelligence services and operations. Under the terms of this Bill, officials may decline to provide evidence and broad security claims could be used to justify withholding sensitive or potentially embarrassing information. Far too often in the past we have seen the British Government, in particular, misuse these type of provisions in relation to national security for failing to disclose information related to collusion, for example. I want to say clearly that national security must not be used to conceal failures or wrongdoings. While every jurisdiction has lawful national security issues - we all recognise that - the question is how wide or narrow these are and how they are defined in law. We have seen national security clauses used as a vague, undefined concept by the British Government to effectively veto the release of information that it did not want to release, so the way the concept is applied here is of paramount importance. The families and survivors of Omagh also have genuine concerns that the current draft may give rise to difficulties that could undermine its intended purpose, and these concerns need to be addressed. I was taken aback and surprised when a representative for the families told me the Minister is refusing to meet with the families at this stage. I remind the Minister that in December last, when he announced the drafting of this legislation, he stated that "the legitimate needs and expectations of victims’ families and survivors who have long searched for truth and accountability" would be at the heart of this approach. I would question how the Minister can marry making such a statement with refusing to meet with members of families and survivors. I urge the Minister to listen to the families directly in relation to concerns they have about this legislation. The families were also taken aback at the fact they were given no sight of the legislation before it was published. The unfortunate consequence of that is that it has left families in some cases feeling unimportant to a process that should have had them at the core, which would have been trauma informed. I would make that case to the Minister to reconsider that position. The list of people the Minister is refusing to meet seems to be getting longer and longer. That is unfortunate, especially because I can point to instances where people who have been campaigning have met the Minister and those engagements have been productive and worthwhile. The Minister mentioned that the justice committee co-operated with his office in waiving pre-legislative scrutiny to allow the Bill to move swiftly through the Oireachtas, because at the end of the day we all want a system in place that has the full support of the families and victims of the Omagh bombing. That decision to waive pre-legislative scrutiny might not have been the same had members realised there was going to be an issue in terms of engagement with the families. I appeal to the Minister to ensure that meeting takes place before we get to Committee Stage because we want to make sure that the legislation is fit for purpose and, just as importantly, that the voices of the families of the victims of the Omagh bombing are listened to. As this legislation makes its way through the Oireachtas, we are reminded of how the British Government has hidden behind national security concerns for its failures to disclose vital information to Troubles-related victims. We saw, for example, the refusal of the British Government to establish a public inquiry into the 1997 murder of Sean Brown. The First Minister, Michelle O'Neill, rightly described the British Government's behaviour in that case as disgraceful and accused it of showing deep disrespect to the Brown family and the fine, clear High Court and Court of Appeal rulings. We are also reminded of how little co-operation this State has got from the British Government on incidents of collusion in this State. I am minded, as we approach the 52nd anniversary of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, of the continued lack of co-operation from the British Government in handing over papers and files relating to the atrocities, despite the repeated demands from this House. Again, this is completely unacceptable. Prior to this legislation being brought forward, the Irish Government reached a memorandum of understanding with that inquiry, which included commitments on disclosures to the Omagh Bombing Inquiry. The reason I am raising other cases is that the priority now should be to get similar commitments on disclosure regarding events in this State from the British Government. We need to ensure all families and victims have recourse to truth and justice. We have seen several reports being published and limited investigations have been carried out but, again, this State has never delivered a full public inquiry with statutory requirements to compel all relevant evidence relating to Dublin and Monaghan, particularly in respect of material held by British authorities. There has never been a sustained diplomatic or legal pressure applied to force disclosure from the British Government in cases like that, and that has to change. It is absolutely right that the Irish Government co-operates in respect of inquiries, such as the Omagh Bombing Inquiry. That is unanimously agreed across this House. We should also have the right to state that we expect the same level of co-operation from the British Government, which has not been the case up to this point. The British Government must release all information relating to not only that attack but to all others that were perpetrated by the so-called Glenanne gang, and in all instances where British state actors or agents colluded in attacks and murders on this island, be it in the North or South. Before I conclude, I wish to make a couple of observations on the need for this State to deal properly with historical investigations, including but not solely narrowed to, the cases related to the legacy of the conflict and collusion I raised with the Minister last week. To be honest, I found his response quite dismissive. If we are serious - and I think we have every right to - about challenging the British Government on its failure to provide truth and justice or to provide an avenue for legacy issues to be addressed, then we also have to look at the record in this State. In addition to State cases related to collusion and the legacy of the conflict that has been mentioned, there are far too many unresolved cases of historic investigative failures. I have mentioned the issue and legacy of the Garda Heavy Gang, which has never been addressed and for which there has been no accountability for the number of miscarriages of justice that group was involved in, yet nobody has been held to account. It was incredible for the Minister to state there has been no accountability in terms of the facts we know. Agents of this State framed people for crimes they did not commit, including by coercive confessions, with one case resulting in the death of a person who was framed for a crime they did not commit. Nothing or very little has been done for cases related to the legacy of the conflict where there is evidence of collusion, such as the cases of Eddie Fullerton, the Dublin Airport bombing, the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, the case of John Francis Green and the case of Martin Doherty. We also have cases with clear investigative failures that have been raised several times in this House, including the case of Fr. Niall Molloy, the case of Terence Wheelock and the case of Shane O'Farrell. All those cases continue to cast a dark shadow over the criminal justice system in this State. The reason I raise all those cases is that we have to mean what we say when we say victims of historical injustices have a right to answers, truth and justice. That is why I believe there is a very strong case for the establishment of a historical inquiries unit in this State, along the lines of what has been proposed by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties and the Committee on the Administration of Justice. I will say it again: we have all been rightly critical of the approach of British governments relating to issues regarding the legacy but our own record and the record of this State also needs to be addressed. I will say again in my closing remarks that we have to and should co-operate with legacy investigations in other states, particularly where there is pertinent information within State bodies here, as with the Omagh bombing. We also need to ensure we can say, hand on heart, that the outstanding cases in this State are fully investigated. I commend the victims and survivors of the Omagh bombing on the dignified manner in which they have campaigned for truth and justice. Those of us who engage with families across the board, and from different perspectives, are never but overawed and inspired by the way and manner in which they ensure the memory of their loved ones is protected and held in esteem. Their ability to secure truth and justice never wavers. Finally, the principle we should agree on is that all those who have been bereaved as a result of conflict on this island, from whatever perspective, whether their family members were killed by British state agents, republicans, loyalists or loyalists in collusion with the British state, regardless, they all have the same right to truth and justice. We should make that a principle we all agree to and that we agree this House will do whatever is necessary to create the mechanism for which that will happen.

Sentiment score: 0.13