Costs of dealing with the past, “unsustainable” says Commons NI Committee

Update. We are fast approaching decision time on what we do about
the past and how much we are prepared to pay for not moving
beyond it.”
Gregory Campbell MP (more below the fold)

Are costs to be cut in the running of public inquiries and other bodies responsible of unearthing the dark events of the Troubles?
The Common’s Northern Ireland Select Committee clearly think they should be, according to a report now being unveiled in Belfast and available of their website.
“The very high costs of inquiries is unsustainable.” Costs ( like Bloody Sunday’s £183 million and rising) have to be faced… and cannot be a permanent feature of NI life”..

Much on the PSNI’s Historic Enquiries Team. “We are concerned that the HET role is compromising the PSNI’s ability to police the present”
“We are surprised that all historic cases are reviewed by the HET…. They should prioritise re-opening cases ” to relatives who request it.”

The committee are calling for a review of the HET’s cost effectiveness, a subject hitherto hidden from public scrutiny. A £34 million budget could overrun to to £45 million, with 54 cases so far passed to the Police Ombudsman and just one sent for prosecution.

Similarly, ” the extension of the Police Ombudsman’s role to Policing the Past is damaging its efficiency”.

Major new inquiries into past events should only be undertaken with the consent of the Assembly.” ( knowing, surely, any given request could be subject to cross community deadlock.)

And there is a broad hint for Eames/Bradley to report “sooner rather than later”.

This report seethes with frustration at the open-ended costs of all forms of inquiry into the past. It’s written in a kind of parliamentary code. Nevertheless, it’s clear the MPs want a brake imposed on the conduct of ongoing and future examinations, in anticipation of the final Eames-Bradley report. The Cory inquiries are conducted by independent judges, but under the very controversial Public Inquiries Act are subject to cost review by ministers – one reason why Lord Saville himself sensationally declared he wouldn’t preside over one such.

The committee chair and other MPs on the committee will no doubt be explaining themselves during the day. (NI members, Gregory Campbell, Sammy Wilson (DUP), Alasdair McDonnell (SDLP), Sylvia Hermon, UU).

One big question needs an answer : whatever the evidence, will anyone, paramilitary or security forces, be sent to prison for a scheduled offence committed before the Good Friday Agreeement? I do not believe it.

The government response and no doubt divided reactions are awaited. Update Gregory Campbell MP (DUP)


Following the release by the NI Affairs Select Committee of the House of
Commons of a Report on Justice matters including Inquiries investigating
issues in the past. Gregory Campbell said;

“The cost of Inquiries is reaching astronomical proportions. 2009
will see the first in a number of years where the cost reaches
approximately £100m per annum on public inquiries. This is in a
economic climate where all sections of the community are feeling
extreme pressure. The other aspect of these inquiries is that almost
all of them are examining the small number of deaths attributable
to the Security Forces and virtually none of them will look at the
murders carried out by terrorists despite the fact that terrorists were
responsible for the vast majority of all ‘troubles related’ deaths over
the last 35 years.

Last week was a classic case where an Inquest jury looking at the
death of a young man in Londonderry during a riot in 1996 gave the
impression that because proper procedures were not followed by
the Army that they were more to blame than those who caused the
riot. We are fast approaching decision time on what we do about
the past and how much we are prepared to pay for not moving
beyond it.”

NI Committee press statement

Monday 7 July 2008


The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee today publishes its report Policing
and Criminal Justice in Northern Ireland: the Cost of Policing the Past. The
report examines whether the cost of ‘policing the past’ is compromising the
ability of the Police Service of Northern Ireland and the Police
Ombudsman’s Office to carry out their core functions. It praises the
professionalism of the Chief Constable, the Director of the Historical
Enquiries Team and the other staff involved in the Historical Enquiries
Team and acknowledges the unique and challenging nature of their work.

The report recommends that alternative ways of prioritising Historical
Enquiry Team cases are identified in order to target funding more
effectively. Significant additional funding would be required if the project is
to continue with its current approach and the report calls for a mid-term
review to establish the costs and benefits of continuing with the Historical
Enquiries Team in its existing form.

The extension of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland’s remit to
include historic cases has compromised its ability to investigate more
recent complaints against the PSNI and this is having a damaging effect
on the efficiency of the Ombudsman’s Office. The report warns that this
reduced capability risks damaging public perception of the Office and
public confidence in policing. The Committee awaits the conclusions of the
Eames/Bradley Group but notes that this issue must be resolved sooner
rather than later.

The disclosure of intelligence information to statutory inquiries clearly
presents challenges for the police, and for other organisations which are
required to provide sensitive information. The provisions in the Inquiries Act
2005 for agreeing and resolving disputes about redactions have yet to be
tested. It is crucially important that the workings of the Act are carefully
monitored and the Committee will keep a careful eye on how the Act
operates in practice.

The high annual cost of inquiries into past events is financially
unsustainable and the cost of inquiring into the past is an issue that, at
some point, will have to be addressed. The report recommends that the
Northern Ireland Office takes further steps to control the costs of statutory
inquiries and that inquiries other than those already underway or
announced should only be established if agreed by the Northern Ireland

The Committee also says that the Northern Ireland Office must continue to
ensure that the Police Service of Northern Ireland has a budget sufficient to
fulfil its operational remit and to meet its legal obligations with regard to
servicing statutory inquiries.

The Chairman of the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, Sir Patrick
Cormack, said:

“The Committee was very impressed during our visits to Northern Ireland
as part of this inquiry, and also from evidence given to us at Westminster,
by the commitment of police service staff. They face unique challenges
and operate in exceptional circumstances and we saw genuine
determination to provide answers to families bereaved by the Troubles.

“The Police Service of Northern Ireland faces significant demands in terms
of its work with all of the different historical investigations and we are
concerned about the impact of this in relation to the police service’s
primary role in policing the present.

“We very much welcome the work being done by the Consultative Group
on the Past, chaired by Lord Eames of Armagh and Mr Denis Bradley, with
whom we have had very useful discussions. We await their findings with
keen interest.”


The Historical Enquiries Team project was established within the Police
Service of Northern Ireland in 2005 following discussions between the
police service and the Northern Ireland Office about dealing with the legacy
of the Troubles. The Historical Enquiries Team’s role is to re-examine all
deaths attributable to the security situation (the Troubles) between 1968
and 1998.

The Consultative Group on the Past is an independent group established to
consult across the community on the best way to deal with the legacy of
the past in Northern Ireland. Co-chaired by Lord Robin Eames and Denis
Bradley the Group brings together a range of people from across Northern
Ireland and is supported by international advisers.

Former BBC journalist and manager in Belfast, Manchester and London, Editor Spolight; Political Editor BBC NI; Current Affairs Commissioning editor BBC Radio 4; Editor Political and Parliamentary Programmes, BBC Westminster; former London Editor Belfast Telegraph. Hon Senior Research Fellow, The Constitution Unit, Univ Coll. London

  • Steve

    This whole thing could be wrapped un in a month for a few million quid if only the english government would tell the truth

    Madness I know, simple solutions often are

  • graduate

    I’ve thought for ages now that this was all too expensive in monetary terms. Surely to goodness the money could be better spent on hospitals, policing, schools etc??
    Just a point of view

  • heck

    The whole cost issue is a red herring. The real reason in that the british government and their unionist allies don’t want the truth to come out.

    all it would take is for gordon brown to call in the heads of the intelligence services and the head of the british army into his office and tell them to tell him everything that went on. If they don’t then sack them.

    then he releases the information to the public.

    THEY WANT TO COVER UP THE TRUTH!!. expense is an excuse.


    Moderator–if some unionist comes on and says the reason he supports the cover up is to prevent embarrasing SF then ban him from Slugger for life because expecting anyone to believe that crap is insulting.

  • graduate

    Let’s go for it. We’ll see just how embarrassed SF would be, my guess is badly so if Eames/Bradley interim report is anywhere near truthful. i’m quite happy to see truth come out for everybody’s sake. After all NO ONE has clean hands in this matter, not unionists, not republicans and not British or Irish governments. Are you seriously expecting me to believe that SF and the IRA are just abunch of innocents led to bad things by the nasty Brits? If so, pull the other one mate

  • heck

    no graduate, I am not suggesting SF are a bunch of innocents, what I am saying is that any unionist who says he doesn’t want the truth to come out because he doesn’t want to embarass SF is either lying or is an idiot.

    Get all the truth out –about all sides.

    was’nt someone charged recently with the murder of captain nervewreck in S. Armagh, but if one asks for an investigation of the more recent Pat Finucane murder all we hear from the Brits and their amen chorus among unionists and the media is too expensive-too expensive!!

    stop trying to twist my argument graduate–put all the information in the public domain—all of it!!

    and if you don’t want to know the truth about British activity then give the real reason not because you are worried about cost or because you want to spare SF some blushes.

  • “Get all the truth out –about all sides.”

    Won’t happen, heck.

  • lorraine

    the costs argument is a red herring. truth costs NOTHING, just an honest explanation of how one got drawn into questionable deeds. hiding the truth, in inquiries, tribunals and what-not, now that costs millions………

  • heck

    Unfortunately I agree nevin

    but I get offended when the Brits and their allies in the media try and say it is because of cost or when unionists say they don’t want the truth out because they don’t want to embarass Gerry Adams.

    They should not be able to get away with this bull shit.

    Force them to admit that the reason they don’t want the truth to come out is because the think what the government did was OK.

  • joeCanuck

    Money is never wasted. It is just moved around. It doesn’t disappear.
    Hopefully all those newly minted millionaire lawyers have spent their windfall riches locally on new mansions etc.

  • Barcas

    Extract from the British Irish Rights Watch recent Monthly Report

    “It came as a bolt from the blue when the Billy Wright Inquiry announced earlier this month that Counsel to the Inquiry, Derek Batchelor QC, had resigned. It came as an even greater surprise when Derek Batchelor issued a statement saying that he had not resigned but been dismissed and that his offer to carry on in the job had been refused. Given the enormous amount of preparation undertaken by Mr Batchelor, his loss to the Inquiry will be grave and will inevitably mean a long adjournment while a replacement is found and becomes acquainted with all the material. Our hearts go our to Bill Wright’s father, David, who does not have time on his side.”

    Unfortunately the reasons for Mr. Batchelor’s dismissal are not made available, but on the subject of waste, clearly much work will have to be repeated, at great expense, by Mr. Batchelor’s successor. Without the facts it is impoossible to judge (but one can speculate) as to the reasons for this hiatus in the Inquiry.

    We have seen it all before in the Bloody Sunday Inquiry. Just keep wasting time and spending the associated legal fees. Eventually the whole inquiry charade will collapse.

    Anyone taking bets on a commencement date for the Pat Finucane affair?

    No? Thought not.

  • earnan

    I think most of SF’s past is out there. But many in the military/unionist circles have a lot to lose by their actions coming out.

  • Quaysider

    The level of republican denial here is really quite amazing. Gerry Adams hasn’t even admitted he was in the IRA, yet apparently SF’s past is already “out there”.
    Tripe. Information is being concealed to protect both sides and SF is not pushing for full British disclosure because of what that would mean all round. Get used to it, party drones. Your ignorant indignation is just a negotiating asset now.

  • Steve


    Thanks for proving our point, come back any time

  • ulsterfan

    Lets have a full inquiry into all contentious matters.
    Why are the costs so high.
    The answer is simple—lawyers set their own rates which are agreed by the Government.
    If a lawyer says he is entitled to £1500 per day plus expenses and further costs to cover preparation and reading etc he should be told to get lost.
    Are the services of a lawyer any more important than that of a plumber—-debatable.
    I would also have so many that they can be found on every street corner and make them fight for business.
    I suppose the numbers are controlled by Bar Council/Law Society.
    I wonder why they keep them so low.
    The State should register all those competent to practice and take control of all training and assessment of competency thus enabling all to have the right to appear in Court.
    This competition will drive down costs.
    Lets have no more nonsense re independence and high standards which this present system protects.

  • McGrath

    In one regard, the British government cant wait to get rid of NI so it no longer has to explain itself (or at least change the legal footing). The “Truth” will be retained and used as a bargaining tool by the British Government against SF in any reunification deal. Considering there is no major motivation for unearthing the truth within the Unionist political parties, the only chance the “truth” has is to emerge to some distant future generation as unsealed tidbits of public record releases.

  • earnan

    So Adams hasn’t publically admitted it? Everyone knows that he is or was on the Army Council, it doesn’t really matter. So many books have been written about SF/IRA’s history, including many by former SF/IRA men. Hell, we practically know a day by day account of “brownie’ during the Hunger Strike.

    I say let it all out, screw the lawyers. Just make everything public record, if that is at all feasible. We will see who has more to lose.

  • ggn

    “the costs argument is a red herring. truth costs NOTHING, just an honest explanation of how one got drawn into questionable deeds. hiding the truth, in inquiries, tribunals and what-not, now that costs millions………

    Posted by lorraine on Jul 07, 2008 @ 02:30 PM”

    perfect post.

  • doctor

    I couldn’t help but laugh at the irony of Gregory Campbell’s comment about moving beyond the past. Particularly when I go further into his comments and feel like his real objection is to the main focus of the inquiries (the security forces), as he perceives it, rather than a genuine belief in moving beyond the past. In fairness, both sides are guilty of it:calling for people to move beyond the past when it is convenient, but insisting their own long-held grievances are first addressed.

  • truth and justice

    I noticed from the TV that the UUP MP Lady Hermon was not in attendence does anyone know what is going on?