Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Lab)

My Lords, as the final Back-Bench speaker I know a lot has been said, but I would like to give a perspective from Northern Ireland. I welcome the opportunity to participate in the debate. I welcome the Minister, my noble friend Lord Lemos, to the Front Bench, and the participation of my noble friend Lady Levitt. I congratulate all those people who suffered immeasurable grief at Hillsborough on 15 April 1989 on their tenacious campaigning. It is through their campaigning and that of many public representatives in Liverpool and beyond, including the current Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, that this landmark legislation was achieved. But we must not forget the victims of Grenfell, the Post Office scandal, the infected blood issue, sodium valproate and the mesh. On all these issues, people were confronted with a lack of closure, information and transparency. They deserve those things, and I hope that this legislation will be the vehicle that will provide them with that necessary closure, accountability, truth and, above all, justice. From a Northern Ireland perspective, I have a couple of questions for my noble friend the Minister. First, can he confirm when the legislative consent Motion will be approved by the Northern Ireland Executive and the Assembly, and whether he has had any discussions with the Executive and Assembly regarding the passage of the legislative consent Motion? Secondly, I have been contacted by the victims’ and survivors’ commission and Amnesty International in Northern Ireland, which want to ensure that the Bill, which they support, introduces a duty of candour and that it applies to all, to ensure the necessary accountability and transparency. Those bodies representing victims in Northern Ireland want the duty of candour to apply to all, including the security services, which for too long have been cloaked in secrecy and, in some instances, shielded people from the truth. It is not clear to us—we will seek clarification—that the draft legislation as it stands will apply the duty of candour to ICRIR, the succeeding body of which will be the Legacy Commission. On this point, the definition of “inquiry” and “investigation” in paragraph 8 of Schedule 1 to the Public Office (Accountability) Bill applies only to other investigations, but the definition of an investigation is broad. We would like clarification on that. If the duty of candour does not apply to any ICRIR successor bodies, there will be a serious and deeply concerning inequity between reinstated inquests and the Legacy Commission investigations, including inquisitorial proceedings. This is especially a concern given the intent to funnel investigations concerning sensitive information to a new Legacy Commission. I have already given my noble friend the Minister sight of my question in relation to this issue. The duty of candour must apply to all Troubles investigations. Can my noble friend the Minister offer the assurance today that it will? Finally, credit for this legislation must go to the Hillsborough campaigners, their families, their public representatives, the Prime Minister and the Government, for their persistence in seeking truth and accountability for those who have been wronged—in 1989, since then and even before then. That is what we are looking to see. I see this legislation as the vehicle and the pathway to do just that.