Opinion

Birmingham bomb relatives hit familiar legacy excuses

Newton Emerson

Newton Emerson

Newton Emerson writes a twice-weekly column for The Irish News and is a regular commentator on current affairs on radio and television.

West Midlands Police have announced they will oppose an inquest into the 1974 IRA pub bombings. Picture by PA Wire
West Midlands Police have announced they will oppose an inquest into the 1974 IRA pub bombings. Picture by PA Wire West Midlands Police have announced they will oppose an inquest into the 1974 IRA pub bombings. Picture by PA Wire

IT is becoming increasingly clear that Lord Justice Weir, who is reviewing stalled Troubles inquests, is about to thoroughly debunk every official excuse for delay.

The PSNI is getting its response in early by clarifying how its new Legacy Investigation Branch will operate.

We are all aware of the difficulties around dealing with the past in Northern Ireland but what is the excuse for similar stalling in Birmingham?

West Midlands Police have announced they will oppose an inquest into the 1974 IRA pub bombings.

Relatives of the 21 victims, represented by Belfast firm KRW Law, have been given a familiar list of explanations centred on how long ago the crimes took place, how difficult this makes them to investigate, yet also how the “technicalities” of an inquest might obstruct this supposedly impractical investigation.

As campaigners in Birmingham have noted, police can barely restrain themselves from investigating 40-year-old sex crimes, as long as there is alleged celebrity involvement. Is a judge going to have to point that out?

**

The Fresh Start agreement’s main truth recovery body is starting to look like a truth concealment body.

The Independent Commission on Information Retrieval (ICIR) has to attract voluntary cooperation yet it cannot offer immunity from prosecution, so there is a logic to the secrecy it is offering in return for testimony.

But making it a criminal offence to publish any details of its investigations risks the ludicrous prospect of someone - perhaps even a bereaved relative - being dragged into court over a murder for which nobody has or ever will be punished.

**

Assembly procedure was to blame when the UUP failed to get a fair employment amendment discussed during a debate on the Shared Education Bill.

However, as UUP education spokesperson Sandra Overend noted, there have been “a whole series of episodes” where Stormont has refused to lift the exemption of schools from fair employment legislation.

In fact, so committed are many of our legislators to discriminatory hiring of teachers that they would no doubt have approved of it during a ‘shared education’ debate.

**

Sinn Fein is campaigning against a UK exit from the EU, which looks a little odd for a formerly Eurosceptic party whose raison d’etre is exiting the UK.

However, Sinn Fein certainly shares the Brussels view on democracy, which is to keep holding elections until you get the right result.

Last month, party delegates in Fermanagh and South Tyrone failed to reselect sitting MLA Phil Flanagan.

Connolly House has now instructed the constituency that it does not accept this result and the vote should be held again.

There is no suggestion that anything about the initial vote was flawed.

**

For people whose job is making a case, Northern Ireland’s barristers are terrible at making a case for themselves.

The Bar Council has passed a resolution to stop engaging with the Department of Justice over the legal aid strike until the department “puts forward reasonable and sensible proposals for consideration”.

Of course, the reasonableness of a proposal can only be determined by giving it consideration, as anyone charging the higher rate of legal aid ought to know.

**

Last weekend a Sunday newspaper published a full-page article on an assembly employee who had posted rude remarks about unionists on social media.

Now it transpires that the Assembly Commission has sacked three staff and suspended three more over any online activity that might be remotely considered ‘political’, down to retweeting news stories off Stormont’s intranet, according to TUV leader Jim Allister.

It appears that faced with a discipline issue regarding political remarks, the commission is ensuring it is not accused of punishing the particular content of any remarks.

Alternatively, it could just accept that all adults have opinions and they should not lose their livelihoods for voicing them. But sure, that’s just crazy talk.

**

Lobby groups Farmers For Action and the Northern Ireland Agricultural Producers Association have commissioned a report demanding that Stormont legislate to ensure supermarkets pay at least the production cost of milk.

However, there is no discussion in the 6,000 word document of the subsidy per acre farmers receive from Europe’s taxpayers, amounting in Northern Ireland’s case to 87 per cent of average income.

If farmers were to be guaranteed a break-even price for their goods, what possible justification could there be for the subsidy?

**

Sinn Fein ministers have been signing off recommendations for British honours, according to information uncovered by the Beyond the Pillars blog.

Education minister John O’Dowd, who has criticised “nationalists and republicans” for accepting honours, turns out to be the most prolific gong-awarder in the executive.

Responding to the story, Sinn Fein said its ministers do not want to disrespect “those from the unionist community” who value royal recognition.

This is an admirable sentiment but can it not be extended to nationalists and republicans who might see rejecting an honour as disrespectful?

To put it another way, if Ireland had an honours system, how would Sinn Fein feel about unionists who spurned a medal from the Aras?

newton@irishnews.com