Northern Ireland Troubles Bill: Access to Justice
Wednesday, 21 October 2026
Contributions
Ian Byrne (Liverpool West Derby) (Lab)Labour
2. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill on access to justice for victims and survivors of the troubles.
Andy McDonald (Middlesbrough and Thornaby East) (Lab)Labour
6. What assessment he has made of the potential impact of the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill on access to justice for victims and survivors of the troubles.
The Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Chris Bryant)Labour
The Northern Ireland Troubles Bill, which finished its remaining stages in this House yesterday, will deliver a reformed independent legacy commission with stronger disclosure powers that will be critical for families and victims seeking answers and access to justice. It will also repeal the immunity scheme and lift the bar on civil claims, which the previous Government’s Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023 wrongly introduced.
I know that my right hon. Friend is fully aware of the care we must all take over the language we use when we discuss troubles-related affairs. He may recall that the Law Society and the Bar Council have called recent references by some hon. Members to supposed “IRA lawyers” grossly irresponsible and said that it puts people at risk. Given the tragic history of the murder of lawyers such as Pat Finucane and Rosemary Nelson, will he join me in urging all hon. Members to take extreme care over their language and recognise that their words can have tragic consequences and completely undermine the confidence of bereaved families and victims, which is essential to ensuring a balanced and credible legacy process?
First, I would say that the legal profession is a noble profession and that— [ Interruption. ] I am not sure I have carried the Conservative Front Bench with that line. If we are to uphold the rule of law, we have to make sure that lawyers are protected in their ability to defend people in the criminal justice system. The idea that everyone is innocent until proven guilty is fundamental to our system. That is why I think it behoves all of us to be careful about our language.
The Bill we passed last night gives the Attorney General of England and Wales the power to override decisions on troubles-related prosecutions, yet the Secretary of State told the House yesterday: “This is not to take anything away from the prosecuting authorities in Northern Ireland or in Great Britain.” —[ Official Report , 20 October 2026; Vol. 791, c. 1018.] But that is precisely what the Bill does. The Attorney General could effectively overrule a decision by Northern Ireland’s independent Public Prosecution Service. How can the Secretary of State reconcile that with the 2000 criminal justice review that flowed from the Good Friday agreement, which deliberately removed political interference from prosecution decisions?
Let me be absolutely clear: there will be no political interference in any of these decisions. We think that it is appropriate—as was recommended by the Joint Committee on Human Rights, made up of Members from both our two Houses—that the prosecuting authorities in Northern Ireland and in England and Wales both come to their conclusions. We will draw up guidelines on how to deal with troubles-related issues that may follow on from the legacy commission. But in the end, the final prosecutorial decision is a very simple non-political one: whether it is in the public interest and whether there is more than a 50% likelihood of getting a successful conviction. I am glad that yesterday evening the Committee of the whole House agreed that without a Division.
Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)Traditional Unionist Voice
How does the Secretary of State think victims of the Provisional IRA felt when they heard the Police Service of Northern Ireland confirm that the provos still exist and that the Chief Constable, and perhaps the Secretary of State, were influenced on Drumcree by the feelings of the Provisional IRA? What does that even mean—taking account of the feelings of the Provisional IRA?
Mr Speaker, I know that you would not want me to intrude on an ongoing judicial review. The judge reserved his judgement yesterday, so I will not do that, I am afraid.
Dr Andrew Murrison (South West Wiltshire) (Con)Conservative
The Government’s Bill will undoubtedly open up the prospect of reopened coroners’ inquests into deaths that occurred during the troubles. What confidence does the Secretary of State have in the Northern Ireland coronial service to deliver truth and justice—and, importantly, access to the truth—for victims and veterans compared with the coronial system in England and Wales?
I note that the cast list for the Chamber today is very similar to yesterday’s and the day before, and that some of these issues were adumbrated in the discussions we had. There is obviously a difference in the coronial system in Northern Ireland. I have heard people make suggestions about how we might want to reform it. One of the reforms we have put in the Bill, which I think is important, is that inquests will no longer be allowed to repeat processes undergone elsewhere, just as the legacy commission will not be able to do so.
Mr SpeakerSpeaker
I call the shadow Secretary of State.
Alex Burghart (Brentwood and Ongar) (Con)Conservative
As this is the Secretary of State’s first Northern Ireland questions, may I welcome him to his place? Victims and survivors of the troubles will, as the hon. and learned Member for North Antrim (Jim Allister) said, be deeply concerned to hear that on Monday police intelligence documents produced in the High Court in Belfast referred to the ongoing existence of the IRA. Will the Secretary of State please tell the House: is it the Government’s understanding that the IRA is still active?
I am afraid that the hon. Gentleman is asking me to talk again about proceedings in the High Court in Northern Ireland, and I think it would be inappropriate for me to do so.
With all due respect, I was not asking the Secretary of State to comment on the case; I know that he cannot. I was asking him to tell us what the Government’s considered opinion is on whether the IRA is still active. That is important, because one of the documents produced on Monday revealed—
In the court case.
This is for context. The document revealed that the Secretary of State was told by the police, “it is possible that dissident republicans have already accessed the firearms in the Garvaghy Road area, and it is possible that in the event of police removing protesters, firearms may be used to attack police.” It would not interfere with the court process for the Secretary of State to tell us this: is it his understanding that the IRA has rearmed?
The shadow Secretary of State is asking me to comment on documents produced in the judicial review into my decision on Drumcree. I am not going to do that, because I think it would conflict with the judicial review process and I do not want to be held in contempt of court.
I call the Liberal Democrat spokesman.
Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)Liberal Democrat
As the Secretary of State said, the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill has now passed to the other place, notwithstanding the continuing concerns of senior generals and veterans associations; more still needs to be done. I than him for his sustained engagement and openness with veterans organisations, including the SAS Regimental Association, with whom I have been working closely. We must avoid any adversarial framing of the relationship between veterans and victims, as I remain convinced that a compromise to ensure proper protections for veterans can be achieved while delivering justice for victims. Will he commit to continuing to work with the SAS Regimental Association and its lawyers to ensure that the Bill delivers the vital safeguards that our veterans need?
Yes.
Gavin Robinson (Belfast East) (DUP)Democratic Unionist Party
The Secretary of State will know that Micheál Martin will apologise today to the family of Brian Stack, who was murdered by the IRA in 1983. They apologise 43 years later and they apologise after a failed criminal justice investigation with 194 errors and omissions. They are right to do so. Austin Stack, the son of Brian, has also asked that Sinn Féin, and Mary Lou McDonald as its leader, apologise on behalf of her counterparts in the IRA. One of the things that has not been mentioned over the last two days is how much confidence there will be that those who took lives and hold deep and dark truths will share them with the loved ones of victims. Can the Secretary of State give any confidence on that?
I heard the interview this morning on the radio, and I warmly welcome the fact that the Taoiseach will make that apology. It is entirely right and proper. This relates to some of the discussions that we had yesterday and the day before about how the Irish Government deal with the issues of the past. This was a prison guard from the United Kingdom who was killed in Dublin. I also heard the point that his son Austin made, when he said that the apology “means an awful lot to us”. It is incumbent on all of us to make fulsome, and not mealy-mouthed, apologies.
One of the fundamental principles of the debate yesterday and on Monday was that of upholding the rule of law, and the Secretary of State will know our questions about how the rule of law is upheld in Northern Ireland. I know that he buckled when individuals suggested that the Government had bent the knee to terror, yet some of the revelations from the court proceedings over the last two days give greater clarity to the thought process that lay behind the PSNI’s position. My question is this: given the situation that we are in, will the Secretary of State engage, not only to uphold the rule of law and ensure that criminal sanctions go beyond blocking a road, but to provide political accountability for those who breach their pledge of office?
The right hon. Gentleman makes a strong point about political accountability. The rule of law is something that we all pledge to uphold when we become Members of Parliament. That is also true of Members of the Legislative Assembly and, for that matter, members of the Executive. I also think that we need to have political accountability for the finances in Northern Ireland. It is really important that we make sure that at some point or other, the Northern Ireland Executive get round to settling a budget. We have set aside more than £1.5 billion for the next three years. I look forward to conversations with the right hon. Gentleman and others tomorrow, and I very much hope that we might be able to settle that. He is right that we need to have political and financial accountability, and if that means changing the Northern Ireland Act 1998 to achieve that, I am up for that.
← Previous
Car Dealerships
Next →
Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023: Replacement
Source: UK Parliament Hansard API. Debate ID: 5421806.