Tag: collusion

NI Secretary Hilary Benn announces public inquiry into the murder of Belfast solicitor Pat Finucane

The Secretary of State told Parliament this afternoon (11 September) of his decision to establish an independent inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 into the murder of Patrick Finucane:

With permission, Mr Speaker, I would like to make a statement about the death of Patrick Finucane.

Patrick Finucane was a human rights lawyer. On 12 February 1989 he was brutally murdered in his home in North Belfast by the loyalist paramilitary group, the Ulster Defence Association in front of his wife, Geraldine, who was wounded, and his three children, one of whom is now the Honourable Member for Belfast North.

From that day onwards, Mrs Finucane and her family have campaigned tirelessly in search of answers about the killing of their loved one.

In 1990 an inquest was opened and closed on the same day with an open verdict. 

Subsequently, a number of investigations and reviews were conducted.

In 2001, following the collapse of power sharing, the UK and Irish governments agreed at Weston Park to establish public inquiries into a number of Troubles-related cases, if recommended by an international judge.

Judge Peter Cory was appointed to conduct a review of each case and in 2004 he recommended that the UK Government hold public inquiries into four deaths: those of Rosemary Nelson, Robert Hamill, Billy Wright, and Patrick Finucane. 

Judge Cory also recommended that the Irish Government establish a tribunal of inquiry into the deaths of former RUC officers Bob Buchanan and Harry Breen.

Inquiries were promptly established in all of these cases, with one exception –  the death of Mr Finucane.  

Meanwhile, in 2003 the third investigation by Sir John Stevens into alleged collusion between the security forces and Loyalist paramilitaries had concluded that there had been state collusion in Mr Finucane’s killing. 

That investigation was followed by the conviction, in 2004, of one of those responsible, Ken Barrett.

With criminal proceedings concluded, the then Northern Ireland Secretary, Paul Murphy, made a statement to Parliament setting out the Government’s commitment to establish an inquiry. But despite a number of attempts, the Government was unable to reach agreement with the Finucane family on arrangements for one.

In 2011, the coalition government decided against an inquiry. Instead, a review of what had happened – led by Sir Desmond de Silva QC – was established. Sir Desmond concluded that he was left “in no doubt that agents of the State were involved in carrying out serious violations of human rights up to and including murder.”

The publication of his findings in 2012 led the then-Prime Minister, David Cameron, to make an unprecedented apology from this despatch box to the Finucane family on behalf of the British Government, citing the “shocking levels of State collusion” in this case.

In 2019, the Supreme Court found that all the previous investigations had been insufficient to enable the State to discharge its obligations under Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. 

The Court identified a number of deficiencies in the State’s compliance with Article 2.  In particular, Sir Desmond’s review did not have the power to compel the attendance of witnesses; those who met Sir Desmond were not subject to testing as to the accuracy of their evidence; and a potentially critical witness was excused from attendance.

In November 2020 the then Secretary of State for Northern Ireland announced that he would not be establishing a public inquiry at that time, pending the outcome of continuing investigations, but that decision was quashed by the Northern Ireland High Court in December 2022.

Mr Speaker, this Government takes its human rights obligations – and its responsibilities to victims and survivors of the Troubles – extremely seriously. 

And the plain fact is that two decades on, the commitment made by the Government – first in the agreement with the Irish Government, and then to this House – to establish an inquiry into the death of Mr Finucane remains unfulfilled. 

It is for this exceptional reason that I have decided to establish an independent inquiry into the death of Patrick Finucane under the 2005 Inquiries Act.

I have, of course, met Mrs Finucane and her family. First on 25 July to hear their views, and again yesterday, to inform them of my decision. Mrs Finucane asked the Government to set up a public inquiry under the 2005 Act and – as I have just told the House – the Government has now agreed to do that, in line with both the 2019 Supreme Court ruling and the Court of Appeal judgement in July this year.

In making this decision, I have, as is required, considered the likely costs and impact on the public finances. It is the Government’s expectation that the inquiry will – while doing everything that is required to discharge the State’s human rights obligations –  avoid unnecessary costs given all the previous reviews and investigations, and the large amount of information and material that is already in the public domain.

Indeed, in the most recent High Court proceedings, the Judge suggested that an inquiry could “build on the significant investigative foundations which are already in place”.

Mr Speaker, as part of my decision-making process, I did also consider whether to refer this case to the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery. The Commission has powers comparable to those provided by the Inquiries Act to compel witnesses and to secure the disclosure of relevant documents by state bodies – powers identified by the Supreme Court as being crucial for the Government to discharge its human rights obligations.

The Commission was found in separate proceedings in February this year by the High Court to be sufficiently independent and capable of conducting Article 2 compliant investigations, and while I am committed to considering measures to further strengthen the Commission, I have every confidence in its ability, under the leadership of Sir Declan Morgan, to find answers for survivors and families.

However, given the unique circumstances of this case, and the solemn commitment made by the Government in 2001 and again in 2004, the only appropriate way forward is to establish a public inquiry.

Mr Speaker, many of us in this House remember the savage brutality of the Troubles – a truly terrible time in our history – and we must never forget that most of the deaths and injuries were the responsibility of paramilitaries, including the Ulster Defence Association, the Provisional IRA, and others, and we should also – always – pay tribute to the work during that time of the Armed Forces, police and security services, the vast majority of whom served with distinction and honour, and so many of whom sacrificed their lives in protecting others.

It is very hard for any of us to understand fully the trauma of those who lost loved ones – sons and daughters, spouses and partners, fathers and mothers – and what they have been through, and there is of course nothing that any of us can do to bring them back or to erase the deep pain that was caused.

But what we can do is to seek transparency to help provide answers to families, and to work together for a better future for Northern Ireland which has made so much progress since these terrible events. I hope that this inquiry will – finally – provide the information that the Finucane family has sought for so long.

The Government will seek to appoint a Chair of the Inquiry and establish its Terms of Reference as soon as possible, and I will update the House further.

Mr Speaker, I commend this Statement to the House.

‘After 35 years of cover-ups, it is time for truth’

STATEMENT BY GERALDINE FINUCANE ON BEHALF OF THE FINUCANE FAMILY

I welcome the announcement of the Secretary of State in the House of Commons today, that an independent statutory public inquiry will be established into the murder of my husband, Patrick Finucane.

After 35 years of campaigning for such an inquiry, I believe this announcement represents a significant step forward for my family in our fight to uncover all of the circumstances behind Pat’s murder.

It has been a long journey to get to the point where the establishment of an independent public inquiry has finally become a reality. I look forward to having the opportunity to participate in a statutory inquiry and expose publicly the whole truth behind the murder of my husband.

This has always been the objective of the campaign that my family and I have pursued for 35 years. We have only ever been concerned with uncovering the truth. It is this that has kept us going.

It is the thing that has been missing, all these years. We did not believe that his murder was simply the work of gunmen who killed him. We had no confidence that police investigations would ever bring those truly responsible to justice.

We were not satisfied with private, limited reviews from which we were excluded. We could not and did not accept the assurances of previous British governments that they were anxious to set the record straight, because they were never prepared to do so in public.

An independent, statutory public inquiry is and was the only way to bring the whole truth behind the murder of Pat Finucane into the light of day.

The journey to this point is not one that my family and I have had to endure alone. Indeed, we would never have succeeded without the assistance and support and encouragement of so many people over the years.

I could not begin to thank them all by name here today. So many people, all over the world, were willing to give generously of their time and talent again and again. I want to record my heartfelt thanks and gratitude to each and every one of them.

We would not be here today without them.

However, I would like to single out one person out for special mention, and that is Peter Madden. Peter was my husband’s business partner and friend, throughout Pat’s all-too-short legal career.

He has been a source of unending strength and resilience. I cannot thank him enough for what he has done for my family, or, indeed, the entire legal team that has represented us so fearlessly and brilliantly in our fight for a public inquiry.

Most of all, I believe this inquiry can be a watershed moment in the difficult subject of legacy in this part of our island. If a public inquiry in to the murder of Pat Finucane can finally publicly examine all of the collusion that plagued our society for so many years, then there is hope that the real process of healing can begin.

The murder of Pat Finucane is the last remaining Weston Park case. It is high time it was properly investigated, publicly examined, and finally resolved.

I believe that my family deserve this after so many years. Pat Finucane deserves this after so many years. Society as a whole deserves this, after so many years.

After 35 years of cover-ups, it is time for truth.

MORE COMMENTS:

IRISH TAOISEACH SIMON HARRIS

MICHEAL MARTIN, IRISH MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS

I welcome the announcement that the Finucane family has secured a public inquiry into the killing of their beloved father and husband, Pat Finucane.

Today is a testament to the unwavering spirit and resolve of Pat’s wife, Geraldine, and their children, Katherine, Michael, and John.

The Finucane family’s determination and dignity throughout 35 years of the most difficult of campaigning has brought about this landmark day.

Their campaign has been an inspiration to all families struggling for truth and justice. I will continue to support the Finucane family as they continue on their journey towards truth and justice for Pat.

MICHELLE O’NEILL, FIRST MINISTER – NORTHERN IRELAND ASSEMBLY

Irish Council for Civil Liberties

High food prices NOT driven by lack of supermarkets competition, says CMA

  • Evidence to date indicates high food price inflation has not been driven by weak retail competition, but competitive pressure is important as input prices fall
  • Next phase of CMA probe will examine competition and prices across the supply chain for the product categories identified
  • Rules on unit pricing should be tightened and retailers must comply to help shoppers compare prices easily

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has today published an initial update on its ongoing work to tackle cost of living pressures in groceries with the publication of two reports: an assessment of retail competition in the groceries sector and a review of unit pricing practices across major retailers.

At a time when food and other grocery prices are rising it is crucial that people can be confident that competition is working effectively to keep price rises as low as possible and that people can shop around and compare prices easily and with confidence.

Groceries

Over the past two months, the CMA has assessed how retail competition is working in the UK grocery sector, particularly between supermarkets such as Asda, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s and Tesco as well as discounters, including Aldi and Lidl. Looking at the effectiveness of retail competition across the market, this stage of the CMA’s review has focused on the extent to which rivalry between retailers ensures they keep their prices as low as possible and whether consumers can shop around to get the best deals.

Although food price inflation is at historically high levels, evidence collected to date by the CMA indicates that competition issues have not been driving this.

In particular:

  • Operating profits in the retail grocery sector fell by 41.5% in 2022/23, compared with the previous year while average operating margins fell from 3.2% to 1.8%. This is due to retailers’ costs increasing faster than their revenues, indicating that rising costs have not been passed on in full to consumers.
  • Consumers are shopping around to get the best deals, and the lowest-price retailers – Aldi and Lidl – have gained share from their competitors. This suggests retailers are restricted in their ability to raise prices without losing business.

However not everyone is able to benefit fully from strong competition, particularly those who cannot travel to large stores or shop online, and therefore may rely on higher-priced convenience stores.

Now that some input costs are starting to fall, there are some signs that grocery retailers are planning to start rebuilding their profit margins. The CMA will monitor this carefully in the months ahead, to ensure that people benefit from competitive prices as input costs fall.

The CMA’s review so far has focused on overall indicators of effective retail competition. It has not yet examined competition for individual product categories or across the wider grocery supply chain. This will be an important focus for the next phase of its work. Today’s update identifies 10 indicative product categories (including milk, bread, and baby formula) that merit further analysis to gain a deeper understanding of competition and price dynamics. Our choices are not an indication of any provisional concerns that competition for these products is ineffective.

As part of its ongoing work, the CMA could make recommendations to address any competition issues it finds or take a closer look at any areas which justify further scrutiny.

Unit Pricing

At a time when shoppers are looking for the most competitive deals, unit pricing provides critical information to ensure people can compare prices effectively.

The review looked at 11 supermarkets and 7 variety retailers (stores that sell homeware and household goods with a more limited range of groceries) that operate in the UK .

The CMA has found compliance concerns with the Price Marking Order (PMO) amongst all those it reviewed, however for some retailers these were relatively minor. The CMA has identified that compliance is worse amongst some variety retailers.

Some of the problems stem from the unit pricing rules themselves, which allow unhelpful inconsistencies in retailers’ practices and leave too much scope for interpretation. As a result, shoppers may be finding it hard to spot and compare the best deals.

The CMA’s concerns relate to:

  • Consistency – different measurements are being used for similar types of products, making it hard for consumers to compare deals on a like-for-like basis. For example, tea bags being priced per 100 grams for some products and others being unit priced per each tea bag.
  • Transparency – missing or incorrectly calculated unit pricing information both in store and online. For example, 250ml handwash costing £1.19 but unit priced at £476.00 per 100ml and unit pricing information unavailable online until items were selected.
  • Legibility – unit pricing information being difficult to read, for example text on labels being too small or shelf edge labels being obscured by promotional information or by shop fittings.
  • Promotions – some retailers not displaying unit prices for any products on promotion.

In its report, the CMA has set out recommendations on the unit pricing rules and is calling on the government to reform this legislation, to help shoppers spot the best deals. The CMA has also written to those that are not fully complying with the PMO and expects them to make changes to address its concerns or risk enforcement action.

More broadly the CMA is calling on all retailers to give consumers the unit pricing information they need to make meaningful comparisons, particularly for products on promotion, even before any reforms to the PMO are introduced.

The CMA will publish the findings of its consumer research into the use of unit pricing in Autumn 2023.

Sarah Cardell, CEO of the CMA said: With so many people struggling to feed their families, it’s vital that we do everything we can to make sure people find the best prices easily.

“We’ve found that not all retailers are displaying prices as clearly as they should , which could be hampering people’s ability to compare product prices. We’re writing to these retailers and warning them to make the necessary changes or risk facing enforcement action . The law itself needs to be tightened here, so we are also calling on the government to bring in reforms.

“We’ve also looked at how competition is working across the grocery retail market more widely. The overall evidence suggests a better picture than in the fuel market, with stronger price competition between all of the supermarkets and discounters. In the next phase of our work, we will examine competition and prices across the supply chain for the product categories we’ve identified.

“We’ll also continue to monitor the situation to ensure that competition remains effective as input costs start to fall.

More information and full reports can be found on our 

Unit Pricing and Groceries pages.