Debate contribution: The Troubles: Irish State Role

Debate contribution by Mrs Naomi Long on .

MLA
Mrs Naomi Long
Party at the time
Alliance Party
Date
11 March 2025
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Private Members' Business
Heading
The Troubles: Irish State Role
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 4855864

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I thank the Members who tabled the motion on this important and sensitive issue. Initially, the Executive had not intended to provide a ministerial response to the debate, given that the issues engaged in the motion fall entirely outside the devolved space. However, in recognition of the amendment's specific call on me, as Minister of Justice, I felt that it would be discourteous to Members and, most importantly, to the victims of the Omagh bombing not to acknowledge the debate and respond to it insofar as I can, albeit I do so solely in a ministerial capacity and, therefore, may be more restrained in what I say than would otherwise be the case were I participating simply as leader of the Alliance Party.

The UK Government have responsibility for determining how to deal with the legacy of the past, which, as we all acknowledged in the debate, is a complex and sensitive issue. It includes engaging with other Governments, including the Irish Government, on any role that they might need to play in the process. I have made my position on their wider approach clear on many occasions, both in my capacity as Justice Minister, where it impacts upon my Department, and as a party leader, more widely. I do not intend to rehearse all those points today. The Omagh Bombing inquiry is:

"an independent statutory public inquiry, established by the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, to investigate whether the bombing in the town of Omagh in August 1998 could reasonably have been prevented by UK state authorities."

The inquiry is charged with considering the adequacy of the measures taken by a number of state authorities, including the RUC:

"to disrupt those dissident republican terrorists who had been involved in terrorist attacks or attempted terrorist attacks in the period"

leading up to the Omagh bombing. In 2021, the High Court determined that the state had an obligation to conduct an article 2-compliant investigation into allegations that there was a real prospect of preventing the terrible atrocity. Therefore, it would, obviously, be for the Secretary of State to formally engage with the Irish Government in relation to the Omagh Bombing inquiry, given that it was set up by him, and that it relates to terrorism and international relations, which are reserved and excepted matters respectively. While my Department has no role in the conduct of the inquiry, I, like many of you, have been deeply moved by the witness testimonies that have been given thus far. They have been harrowing and distressing to hear and, no doubt, to recount. The unimaginable pain and suffering, as well as the grief, that people have carried as a result of their exposure to such reckless and wanton violence are hard to comprehend. I fervently hope that victims and their families are able to access justice through the process that the Secretary of State has established. I also acknowledge that it is important for all of us in Northern Ireland to have full confidence in the inquiry, that the inquiry is able to access all the relevant data and information and that anyone who has information provides it to the inquiry and be fully cooperative with it. Whilst there has been considerable discussion about the compellability of testimony and evidence from the Irish state, I hope that the Irish Government live up to their commitment to fully cooperate with the inquiry, and that such compulsion should not be required. When we are aware of information that could bring someone else truth and justice, it is a moral obligation that falls on all of us that we disclose that information and cooperate in every way that we can. When raised with my counterpart, the Irish Justice Minister, Jim O'Callaghan, during an engagement that I had with him, just yesterday, I was somewhat reassured by the fact that he reiterated, on behalf of the Irish Government, their commitment to cooperate fully with the Omagh Bombing inquiry that is under way. However, as many have stated in the Chamber today, that commitment will only be fully reliable once it is put into action. Words count for very little in this space when confidence is so low and trust is at a premium. The issue of whether there is a separate inquiry in Ireland is, again, a matter for the Irish Government and not one into which the Department of Justice in Northern Ireland can intrude. However, one issue that was raised by the Irish Justice Minister yesterday, in response to the question, was his concern, which, to some degree, I share, that an entirely separate inquiry could result in putting people through an often-traumatic process of recounting their experiences for a second time. It is therefore sensible to fully explore whether a suitable mechanism can exist by which people will be sufficiently reassured that they will get full accountability and full truth from the inquiry that is taking place. At all times, we need to be fully mindful of the impact on the victims, witnesses, first responders and wider society of being re-exposed to and having to recount some of the most traumatic experiences that they have ever endured. Whilst any such inquiry is not within the vires of my Department, and I cannot compel another state to hold their own inquiry or, indeed, fully cooperate with the current inquiry, I, nevertheless, fully understand and have sympathy with the concerns and sensitivities involved, which have been raised in the Chamber today. We will be able to judge fully only when we are sighted of the arrangements that are put in place to give that information to the families and the victims. I am aware that the Irish Government are now actively engaging with the Omagh Bombing inquiry team about finalising the memorandum of understanding that will govern their engagement and information sharing with the inquiry. I hope that that may go some way to providing the confidence that the families need so that, through the inquiry, they will finally be able to achieve the full transparency, truth and justice that they seek and that they truly deserve. As I bring my remarks to a conclusion, my thoughts this evening are with the Omagh families, who have suffered unimaginable heartbreak and borne the loss of their loved ones, as a result of what was a barbaric and cowardly attack, with the utmost dignity. I hope that, at the end of the process, they will receive the truth and the justice that they deserve, whether as a result of the British Government's inquiries and engagement or as a result of the Irish Government's inquiries and engagement.

1,112 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.08 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.71).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (0.92).
  • Subject area: Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism.
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.07No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.03No
Cultural grievance politics0.02No
Dog-whistle messaging0.03No
Controversy escalation0.05No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.71Yes
Overall judgement0.08At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)0.92
Reports or questions it0.01
Criticises or condemns it0.07
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Legacy of the Troubles, victims and paramilitarism0.98
No identity-related subject0.02
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:15 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification