Hansard

The Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Bill proposes an effective amnesty from prosecution for troubles-related offences in exchange for co-operation with a truth retrieval body. The bill would halt future civil cases and inquests linked to killings that took place during the conflict, and it would establish a new independent commission for reconciliation and information recovery, which would be responsible for reviewing deaths and other harmful conduct forming part of the troubles and publishing its findings.

The bill would seemingly effectively draw a line under offences in the troubles era across the UK by ensuring that long-running cases that have not been resolved are closed and closing avenues for justice in cases that did not involve death or serious injury. However, importantly, as Keith Brown said, that view is not shared by virtually any of the political parties and victims groups across the island of Ireland, north and south, which have slammed the substance of the bill. The Democratic Unionist Party is against it. In fact, one of the few issues that all sides of the political debate in Northern Ireland seem to agree on is that the proposal should not proceed. I agree with Edward Mountain that there are great sensitivities among the people of Northern Ireland about their history, but it is for that reason that we must recognise that the proposal does not have the people’s consent.

On top of strong opposition in the north, the Republic of Ireland Government is also against the bill. In a press release, Irish foreign and defence minister Micheál Martin urged that the bill be paused, because it would potentially set back peace in Northern Ireland.

The families of victims of the troubles have also expressed deep concerns about the bill. Some have said that it is

“designed to cause pain and hurt to families seeking the truth about what happened to their loved ones.”

The Council of Europe warned that the bill will diminish rights and accountability in a country that has seen precious little of either. The Council of Europe Commissioner for Human Rights, Dunja Mijatovic, stated that she has

“repeatedly warned”

Westminster

“that the Bill would undermine the human rights of victims, as well as truth seeking, reconciliation and justice efforts.”

Because of such opposition, I worry deeply that the bill, which is opposed by all political parties in Northern Ireland and by victims and survivors of the troubles across nationalist and unionist communities, will be a setback for Northern Ireland.

The bill threatens to undermine the powers of the Lord Advocate—or it did. I heard the cabinet secretary say that there has been a last-minute change regarding the Lord Advocate’s powers. That is to be welcomed, although I would have preferred to have seen it a bit earlier, because the Criminal Justice Committee has scrutinised the bill over a large number of weeks and has made the point that a major objection to it concerns the removal of powers from the Lord Advocate.

I had the privilege of representing Scottish Labour on the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly, which includes all political parties. This year, the British-Irish Parliamentary Assembly marked the 25 years since the Good Friday agreement, which largely ended bloodshed that left 3,600 people dead. I had the privilege of listening to former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, former senator George Mitchell, and former civil servants, who spoke of the incredible coming together of people to ensure the Good Friday agreement.