As the Taoiseach said, the Kenova Report is a difficult read but it is an absolutely essential one for all of us in this House. Everyone must face up to the wrongs of the past honestly and squarely if we are to achieve lasting peace and reconciliation on this island. The survivors and the families of the victims of the atrocities detailed in this report, and society as a whole, deserve no less. We should not seek to excuse or minimise the harm and suffering caused, no matter by whom. We must continue to seek answers and engage with difficult truths such as those found by the Kenova team. The Government is committed to playing its part in addressing the legacy of the Troubles across these islands and has taken, and will continue to take, concrete actions to make this a reality. I will return to those actions later. This report is a hugely important contribution to the search for answers and accountability. It represents the culmination of ten years of painstaking, rigorous work and I echo the Taoiseach's words of appreciation for the leadership provided by Jon Boutcher and Sir lain Livingstone and the dedication of the entire team behind the report. The work undertaken by Kenova across its four workstreams - Kenova, Denton, Turma and Mizzenmast - was wide-ranging and each is of significant public importance. I take this opportunity to express my condolences to all those who were injured or lost family members in the litany of incidents examined in the report. It is the sad reality of the history of the conflict, however, that the question of collusion, which has been so damaging to the pursuit of consensus on the legacy of the Troubles, is at the heart of two of these: Kenova and Denton. As the Taoiseach has rightly said, it is the corrosive effect of all collusion, both known and suspected, that undermines the confidence of families in legacy processes and our collective ability to move on from the conflict. In relation to Stakeknife, the allegations about this figure in the Provisional IRA and his links to British intelligence have been notorious for many years. Kenova has exposed the nature and extent of the collusion that took place in relation to Freddie Scappaticci. Kenova expressed caution about the careless use of the term “collusion”, but there can be no doubt that collusion took place in relation to Stakeknife. It was a perverse form of collusion in which the interests of British intelligence and their efforts to protect their informant at the heart of the Provisional IRA coalesced with the Provisional IRA's own murderous and illegitimate actions to judge and savagely punish those it deemed a threat to its aims. On the part of the British security and intelligence services, there were repeated failures to protect the victims of the Provisional IRA from harm and to bring those responsible to justice. Consequent on this were 27 cases in which Stakeknife was personally connected to the commission of serious criminal offences, including murder, attempted murder and unlawful imprisonment. Informants are vital to policing and security the world over, to the prevention and detection of crime and to safeguarding democratic governments from those who would seek to undermine them by terrorist acts or other threats. What is catalogued in Kenova goes far beyond the rules with which informants and their handlers must abide. Being an informant is not a licence to commit unlawful acts of the most serious kind or to act with impunity. I want to put this on the record to reassure the House. Stakeknife's personal role in the violence carried out by the Provisional IRA is shocking and grotesque but it should not obscure the wider reality that Kenova's casework covered a total of 101 murders and abductions by that organisation. Kenova has rightly framed the Provisional IRA's role in this savage violence against innocent people as grave violations of human rights intended to intimidate and subjugate the community. It is a fundamental principle of human rights that they are universal and transcend political affiliation. There was never any justification for these violations of human rights to occur, even in the course of a bitter sectarian conflict. In relation to Operation Denton, the summary report has underlined what was already either suspected or known in relation to many of the cases under review: that collusion between the UVF and the British security forces was taking place. While Denton concluded that there was no single, easily defined group operating from the Glenanne farm, as has been extensively alleged, it is no less shocking that Denton found evidence that there was a wider, more diffuse network of loyalist paramilitaries and members of the security forces that acted together to carry out vicious sectarian attacks across this island. Ten of those incidents occurred in this jurisdiction, including the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. While Denton found that the prospect of any successful prosecution in relation to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings was extremely unlikely from a UK perspective, I would emphasise, as I have done repeatedly, that the Garda investigations remain open and An Garda Síochána is fully committed to actively pursuing any new evidence that comes to light. That remains the case for all unresolved Troubles-related cases. I want to take this opportunity to refer to another incident, not so well known and publicly remembered, that was also examined as part of Denton. That is the Dublin Airport bombing on 29 November 1975, in which John Hayes, an Aer Lingus employee, a 38-year-old father of three young children, was killed. The 50th anniversary of his death has passed, and it is regrettable that no one has been held accountable. I met his son, Brendan Hayes, recently. Without commenting on our discussion, I would say that it brought to the fore the lack of awareness of the importance of engaging with family members in the aftermath of such traumatic events, and the need to keep them informed of developments in the investigations. In the 1970s, family liaison was not an established concept in policing but, thankfully, policing today is in a very different position, and family liaison is embedded in policing practice. In the joint framework on legacy agreed by the Irish and British Governments last year, both Governments have recognised that we need to have a victim-centred approach to investigations into Troubles-related incidents.

Sentiment score: -0.15

I thank all the Deputies who contributed. It is important at the outset to ask what the purpose of legacy is and what the purpose of Denton and Kenova, which we are discussing today, was. The purpose is to provide answers for families that never got justice and whose family members were killed in brutal circumstances in what everyone can agree was a dirty war on the part of everyone who participated in it. That is the purpose of legacy. There is a further purpose, which is to try to improve and enhance reconciliation so that there can be greater understanding between communities who, to be blunt, were involved in a bloody sectarian campaign and conflict that took place in Northern Ireland for 30 years. That is the purpose of legacy. There is a legitimate objective and political purpose why politicians and governments are seeking to pursue investigations into the past so we can get answers for loved ones who have not been provided with answers today What is the danger of legacy? The danger of legacy is that we just use legacy for our own narrow political purposes. We cannot do that. If we are going to allow the past to be the territory on which the modern conflict is contested, there is no point in having any involvement in the legacy process. Regrettably, it is the case that we do allow the past to be used for our own political purposes. I always listen to Deputy Mac Lochlainn. I mean that. I always listen to him because I think he has very strong contributions to make. Maybe it was just because that he was the last speaker prior to the Acting Chairman but as an example of legacy, Deputy Mac Lochlainn referred to the outrageous murder of Eddie Fullerton, who was an elected politician. We need to remember as well that other politicians such as Robert Bradford and Billy Fox were also murdered. If we are going to have legacy and if it is going to work effectively, we cannot just decide individually that it suits my political agenda to refer to some legacy crimes from the past and not mention others. We need to have a much broader perspective of what is involved in legacy. What will be really difficult is people politically getting behind legacy inquiries into areas that make them feel uncomfortable. I am here as the representative of the Irish Government and I have to answer for the Irish Government. When I have had meetings with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, I refer to his responsibility and the fact that he has answers that would be of benefit to people who were victims in Dublin and Monaghan. We have to be able to recognise that the political representatives of the Provisional IRA are Sinn Féin. That is not a party political point; that is a fact. In terms of trying to get answers for the actions of the Provisional IRA and for the crimes that were committed by the Provisional IRA, Sinn Féin has to answer that in the same way as I answer on behalf of the Irish Government or indeed Hilary Benn has to answer on behalf of the British Government. I listened very carefully to the leader of Sinn Féin. She said she was sorry. She said she was sorry for all the lives lost. I presume, interpret and hope it means that she is apologising for the murders perpetrated by the Provisional IRA. If that is so, it is a positive development. We need to move on from our comfort zones in respect of our legacy. I have been in discussions with the British Government in terms of trying to get agreement on the legacy framework. It is extremely difficult. I heard Deputy Tóibín say earlier that we should not allow the British Government to introduce legislation that enables X, Y or Z. Obviously, neither I nor anyone else in this House can control the legislation that is enacted in the British Parliament, just as the British cannot control the legislation that is enacted here. However, I can tell the House that the opportunity that exists at present for a real and thorough legacy inquiry is much better now than it was with the previous British Government and we need to avail of this opportunity. We also need to recognise that when it comes to investigating the past, the passage of time affects it. This is what is so painful for the families involved in this who have experienced the lack of justice for 30 or more years. When I meet the families of victims, I try to be honest and straight with them and say that, on many occasions, people do not get the justice that they deserve or the justice they want. In most cases relating to the atrocities and murders perpetrated in the past in Northern Ireland, the ones that have not been solved to date, where people have not been brought to the courts, the likelihood is that they will not be brought to justice. That does not diminish the benefit that can come from inquiries and investigations. We saw that with regard to Kenova in respect of Freddie Scappaticci. I read Kenova and I also read Richard O'Rawe's book. It is an horrific example of how lives were viewed as being so dispensable and so unimportant that people were able to allow Freddie Scappaticci to kill in such a relaxed way that it was not an issue. I criticised the British Government for allowing that and I criticised the Provisional IRA for being the parties that were colluding in the murders that were perpetrated by Freddie Scappaticci. When we are dealing with legacy, we have to be able to speak truthfully about issues. I know everyone comes to every debate with their own political objective but there will be no resolution of the legacy issue unless people are prepared to take on board uncomfortable truths and people are prepared to look to see that the entity they represent has answers to give in respect of this matter. In my engagement with victims and families in Troubles-related cases, they have told me that they feel time is running out for them and they are looking for truth and accountability. The reality is that, in many instances, the information that is available will not be retained in a document, on a written piece of paper or in files that will be handed over. It is available to people who are still alive and who are still involved in it. That is why we all have to try to play our role in urging people who have information to give that information and bring it forward. There are people in the North who have information and could provide assistance in terms of truth and reconciliation. We may not have yet provided that forum where that can happen. There are many people trying to think of mechanisms for it to be provided, but I would have thought that the last show in town is the legacy framework that at present is being worked on by the British Government and in respect of which I also will be bringing forward legislation again. I intend to bring forward legislation in this House to give effect to the responsibilities that will lie upon this State. I accept my responsibility. Others have to accept theirs and encourage others who have information to come forward with it. An Garda Síochána has established a unit as is required for the investigations of Troubles-related incidents. The Commissioner has been centrally involved in putting that in place. We need to ensure that where we can have investigations, those investigations take place. If we are going to allow legacy to be simply another battleground on which the green and orange politics of Northern Ireland are fought, we might as well give up. It is of no benefit to anyone because it will all be about whataboutery. We have to acknowledge our responsibility. Everyone in this House has a responsibility. Some have greater responsibilities than others in terms of what happened in the past and we cannot run away from the responsibility for the terrible things that were done on this island for a period of 30 years. When you look back on it, you wonder what it was all about. To get to the Good Friday Agreement? We did not need thousands of people to be killed to get to the Good Friday Agreement. It is depressing. I know it is hard for people who were involved in the violence to ask that question: what was it all about? It is a question that maybe does not need to be answered, but, ultimately, if we want to move on and try to achieve some form of reconciliation and unity, we are going to have to look at this in a more selfless way and stop trying to just advance our own interests.

Sentiment score: 0.01