First Minster Peter Robinson has suddenly had a change of heart; he believes Stormont will now “be fit for purpose.” Since his comments in September 2014 that “Stormont was not fit for purpose”, the institutions have limped on, there has been agreements, disagreements, fall outs, pulling out of Executive Ministers, “hockey cokey” politics, and the usual barrage of abuse amongst politicians– then, the change yesterday – all is “ok” aboard the ship that was sinking a few weeks back. Has yesterday’s agreement been a game changer? A new dawn? Or is this the agreement before more disagreement on the implementation of the agreement, like before? I have learned that positive signals from Stormont are to be taken with a minute pinch of salt.
Ten weeks of discussions and negotiations had led to what has been dubbed Stormont House Agreement Two, or more credibly “Stormont House Agreement” for slow learners with a few bits added in and taken out. Most notably the controversial legacy issue has been left out this time. “A fresh start” for some and “business as usual” for others, notably, the victims of the conflict. Media commentators have been quick to point out that “there is a massive gulf between Sinn Fein and the British Government” over legacy. Is it ever going to be possible for Sinn Fein, the other parties and the British government, to be singing off the same hymn sheet on legacy issues?
Additional and revised money has been directed into numerous areas, to name but a few:
- £585 million over four years to compensate those affected by welfare and tax credit cuts;
- £500 million set aside for shared education has been partially diverted into shared housing;
- £3 million set aside for the Monitoring and Implementation Body to report on paramilitary organisations and structures;
- An additional £150 million to help resources the PSNI over the next 5 years;
- A Commission set up to deal with the old disputable flags, culture and parading that will cost money, although has already cost a consider amount since the flag protests and the Twaddell Avenue, on-going debacle;
- £60 million to bring down peace walls in a divided society. Honestly, are we ready to bring down peace walls? The “confidence and relationship building measures” as stated in the agreement have been non-existent since devolution. What has Stormont up their sleeve to ensure this happen?
But, perhaps the big concern and disappointment is the fact that no new money has been set aside or diverted into dealing with the past. This has angered victims and relatives of victims, and rightly so. The Historical Inquiries Unit, envisaged in the Stormont House Agreement, is now in limbo. Dealing with the past seems to be getting left in the past – dealing with controversial issues is something our politicians cannot do. Welfare, for example – ship it off to Westminster, let them make the decision and take the blame. In the run-up to the Assembly elections we will hear “it was them who did it, they made the calls on welfare reform.” The main parties have been asking for more devolved power, yet are content to hand back powers that have already been devolved! Victims – the attitude seems to be we can’t agree and won’t agree, so therefore we will leave it on the back burner. Thankfully, I am not a direct victim of the troubles, but I genuinely feel it for all those families, whose daily thoughts are on what happened to their loved one. Surely they all deserve answers. They all deserve justice. They all deserve some kind of mechanism to help them. But does it suit all involved, to deal with the past?
Dealing with the past has and will continue to be a divisive and contentious issue. It needs to be a transparent process with all involved. Legacy, will, no doubt prove a stumbling block in the near future, it will not go away, “the past will come back to hunt Stormont.” The needs of victims yet again have been deferred, those waiting for answers will be waiting longer and in essence may never get them. As time progresses the hurt, pain and grief experienced by victims of the conflict continues. The British Government have played the “National Security” card in the past. My assumption is that they are hoping, as time goes on, victims will simply give up in their quest for justice – this won’t happen! No victim should give up!
The British Government has said in the past there will be no more Bloody Sunday style enquires – is this not a barrier to justice? To dealing with legacy? The £190 million Bloody Sunday Enquiry exposed truths that sit very uncomfortably with the British Government – the same truth the British Government would rather not have to contend with. Ruling out any future enquiries and delaying agreement on legacy allow the British Government further breathing space before “uncomfortable conversations” and “truths” about the past are exposed, if they are ever to be. The British Government do not like to hang their dirty linen out in public, but I feel they need to take the lead on this one. Victims have been repeatedly failed for decades and this agreement illustrates that the future will potentially fail them as well. “The best way to escape from the past is not to avoid or forget it.”
Is it possible for society in the North to ever move on, without acceptance and an agreement on dealing with the past?
“The British Government do not like to hang their dirty linen out in public, but I feel they need to take the lead on this one. Victims have been repeatedly failed for decades and this agreement illustrates that the future will potentially fail them as well. “The best way to escape from the past is not to avoid or forget it.”
If Britain is determined to cover up its role in the past then what is there we can do about it really?
It takes two sides to make an agreement and if only one side is willing to compromise then victims are not being treated equally or fairly and as a result any hope of justice will be denied.
some of the victim makers will benefit from the 60 million to be spent on the peace wall quangos,jobs for the boys on both sides eh.