Debate contribution: Legacy: Holding the Irish Government to Account

Debate contribution by Ms Claire Sugden on 23 September 2025.

MLA

Ms Claire Sugden

Party at the time

Independent

Date

23 September 2025

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Private Members' Business

Heading

Legacy: Holding the Irish Government to Account

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5129385

Read the official Assembly record

Text

When we debate legacy in the Chamber, it is important that we be reminded that we are not just debating history in the abstract but talking about people: about families who are still living with loss and about communities that are carrying grief that does not fade with time. Some are into their third generation of waiting, but the questions remain the same and the answers have yet to come. The motion rejects amnesty and insists that any future framework command the confidence of victims and survivors. That is 100% right. It matters that it also holds both Governments to account, because, for too long, one Government have been quick to hold up the other to scrutiny while resisting the same scrutiny themselves. Victims see that imbalance, and it deepens the mistrust. If we want legacy to mean anything, we cannot have double standards. From my previous role, I recall sitting with families who had lost loved ones during the Troubles, but what I remember most from those meetings was the look in their eyes. To an extent, the stories that got them to meet me mattered less than the pain that they continued to carry. What also struck me was their determination. They were not asking for miracles; they were asking simply for truth, disclosure and accountability. Almost a decade on from those meetings, many of those families are still asking the same questions. The fact that they must keep telling us shows how far short both Governments have fallen in giving them the answers. I recently wrote to the Taoiseach, Micheál Martin, to press those points. In his response, he spoke about the development of a substantive package, which we have since heard of, with the restoration of civil cases, stronger investigative powers and enhanced cooperation from an Garda Síochána. I welcome those assurances, but words must be backed by enforceable commitments. They cannot remain aspirations. Without statutory powers and the ability to compel witnesses and guarantee disclosures, victims will, once again, be left with promises and without answers. Omagh makes that clear. The bombing was one of the darkest atrocities of the Troubles. Twenty-seven years on, the families are reliving their trauma through an inquiry that they fought for tirelessly, yet the memorandum of understanding with the Irish Government, while presented as progress, is cooperation in name only. It carries no statutory power, no authority, no powers to compel witnesses and no guarantee that all evidence will be put forward. For the Omagh families, that is not justice; it is delay dressed up as delivery. When we think of Omagh, we think not only of the many lives lost but of the futures that were stolen. Among the victims was Avril Monaghan, who was killed along with her mother, her unborn twins and her daughter, Maura. In that moment, three generations of a family were gone, as was the hope of a new generation, who, had they got to live that day, would never have remembered the Troubles. They would have lived their lives free from the burden of the past, but that never happened, because the atrocity continued. What strikes me most is the innocence of those victims. They were people going about their day. They had no political interests, no political information and no stake in the battles that consumed this place for too long. They were creating lives, raising families and building happiness for their families and children, yet they were dragged into something that they never should have been involved in. It is the victims and survivors — the ordinary people who never asked to be part of it — who carry those consequences, not the politicians or those who claim to be fighting for a cause. That is why legacy is not a matter of convenience for Governments; it is an obligation to the innocent. Omagh is not the only example. As we have heard from others, the family of Ian Sproule still wait for answers about an intelligence file that was allegedly in IRA hands before his murder. Like so many families, they have lived with silence when there should have been candour. Their experience reminds us that, unless both Dublin and London face up equally to their responsibilities, legacy will remain unfinished business. Reconciliation requires honesty. It requires both Governments to be open, candid and accountable, not just when it is convenient but when it is uncomfortable. We know that the truth will never be complete and that justice will not always be possible, but it is our duty to go as far as we can and provide the answers where we can. To stop short, because disclosure is politically awkward, would be another betrayal of those who have already borne too much. I support the motion, because it rejects an amnesty, calls for an assurance that any agreement between the Governments will command the broad support of victims and survivors, demands that no side be beyond scrutiny and recognises that grief does not stop with one generation but passes through families and communities across time, which will continue to happen unless we address it. Northern Ireland cannot afford another false start —

— on legacy. Thank you.

868 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:10 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