Examination of Witnesses (Questions 837-839)
RT HON
PAUL MURPHY
MP, ANGELA SMITH
MP, MR MARK
SWEENEY AND
MR JOHN
CLARKE
9 MARCH 2005
Q837 Reverend Smyth: Secretary of State,
Minister, we are delighted to have you with us. It is some time
since the Secretary of State has been before us in a session,
other than the times we have spent with you discussing things
and we have appreciated those moments. In the absence of the Chairman—nothing
to do with the fact that you are all here, it is just that he
is not 100% well and we are sorry that he is not with us today—I
have been asked to take the chair in his place. I welcome you
and your team and look forward to sharing views with one another
as we face some of the issues that are before us. We are dealing
with the past and, of course, that comes from your statement of
27 May 2004. Would it be possible for you to explain the background
to your announcement on that occasion for a "programme of
discussions" about how to "deal" with Northern
Ireland's past?
Mr Murphy: Yes, thank you. Before
I begin, I would like to say we wish the Chairman all the very
best and a speedy recovery from his illness. I would like to introduce
my colleagues alongside me, some of whom are very well known to
you. Angela Smith, of course, Member of Parliament, is Minister
for Victims in the Northern Ireland Office. John Clarke is the
Head of the Victims Unit of the Office of the First Minister and
the Deputy First Minister. Mark Sweeney is the Head of the Rights
and International Relations Division of the Northern Ireland Office.
They are here to put me right if I go wrong. The background to
the whole question of dealing with the past arose from a request
from the Prime Minister of me that we ought to look very seriously
at how best we could address the issues of over 30 years of Troubles
in Northern Ireland and how they impacted upon the lives of ordinary
people in Northern Ireland. We understood that was a very difficult
task and we also knew that we had to tailor any proposals specifically
to Northern Ireland needs because however much we can make comparisons
with other parts of the world, particularly South Africa, we knew
we had to look at it specifically in Northern Ireland terms and
that it would not be a very easy task for us. One of the first
things that I decided to do was to go to South Africa and talk
with people who had been involved in the truth and reconciliation
process, particularly those who had been involved in the Commission.
After a very interesting week, a very, very useful week, talking
mainly to people who had been members of the Commission, people
who had been involved in the process, people who had been involved
in the changes in South Africa, some of whom have been very useful
friends in the Northern Ireland peace process as well, we came
away with a number of proposals which we thought we should share
with people in Northern Ireland. I suspect you might want to ask
me some more detail about that later on. The general ideas behind
it were, firstly, that we thought the situation in South Africa
could not be picked up en bloc, as it were, and taken to Northern
Ireland, however there were certain things that we learned from
the South African process, one of which was that it could only
flourish if there was political progress and that people who would
have to deal with very difficult issues would only be prepared
to tell their stories before the Commission if there was progress
in the political sense. The other difference was in a country
of 48 million people, which is South Africa, and Northern Ireland,
which has 1.7 million people, there is a huge difference in size
and in how people know each other. We came away with some ideas.
We then decided to embark upon informal consultation to see where
we would go from there. With the best will in the world, at the
moment no-one would suggest that we are making huge political
progress in Northern Ireland. The events of the last few weeks
in particular, and indeed the events of the last few hours, indicate
that there are great difficulties ahead unless we can resolve
the issue of criminal activity on the part of the IRA and other
paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland. It was pretty clear to
me, and I can perhaps elaborate on this by answering other questions
and Angela can help me out, that we could not embark on the sorts
of things we would have liked to embark on until we are making
greater progress but there were things we could do and doubtless
we will get some questions on those during the course of the session.
Q838 Reverend Smyth: Thank you. I have
been brought up in the tradition of John Robinson not to refuse
light from any quarter and, therefore, I am happy to learn things
from South Africa, but I wonder if even the figure of 48 million
is accurate because when I visited there it appeared to me that
they did not know how many people they had as they move backwards
and forwards. You did refer to recent events and your recent statement
of 1 March led you to the conclusion that the time was not right.
Would you be prepared to give us more detail about what led you
to that conclusion?
Mr Murphy: I think that all the
people we have talked to since returning from South Africa, and
there were lots of people, it was not done on a formal consultation
process but rather talking to people, and I can tell you who they
are or give you a list of the people we did talk to, were of the
same view as me, that there have to be clear signs of political
movement for the better for such developments to occur. If we
were to have something along the lines of, but not the same because
it has to be tailored to Northern Ireland, a Truth and Reconciliation
Commission we would have to have two things occurring: one is
political progress and, secondly, consensus on it. I was not convinced
that we could get either. One was self-evident because we were
not making progress in the political sense for all the reasons
everybody here knows. Secondly, there was probably no consensus
overall, certainly in the absence of political progress, as to
the nature of a detailed look at dealing with the past on the
sorts of lines of which South Africa, for example, would be one.
For instance, particularly within the nationalist community there
were some who would regard the Government, for example, as being
a major player in all of this over 30-odd years and they would
look more towards the establishment of a more independent body
which could look into a further consultation. I have not for one
second suggested that we have abandoned the idea of going down
a wider road, as it were, on the question of dealing with the
past, I am simply saying I did not think this was the time for
it and, if anything, it could be counterproductive. The idea of
being able to set up quite an extensive and, indeed, elaborate
consultation system on the whole question of dealing with the
past at a time of really deep political uncertainty I thought
would do damage to such a process rather than help it, hinder
it rather than help it. In a sense, if you like, for the time
being we have shelved the wider consultation until such time as
we think that the people of Northern Ireland (a) would be ready
for it by a consensus and (b) when we get further political progress.
Personally, I hope we will be able to do that. I do not think
the South African model is the model for Northern Ireland but
some sort of system which allows consultation to be held is something
that we could do. We also discovered in South Africa that telling
stories was a very important part of the process. People from
all parts of the community there and, indeed, to a certain extent
it happens now in Northern Ireland, could tell stories about the
past either through books, through film, through video, through
museums, whatever method you would use, but telling the story
from all parts of Northern Ireland we thought would be cathartic
and useful. Again, it is something you have to deal with in a
better atmosphere and that is an atmosphere of progress rather
than an atmosphere of stalemate.
Q839 Reverend Smyth: Certainly recent
events would include a situation where a state which does not
allow capital punishment is faced with a body that illegally claims
to have the power of the state to execute people, would it not?
Mr Murphy: In terms of what happened
yesterday?
|
