logo
Victims' concern over ‘need to promote narrative of peace' before Omagh bomb

Victims' concern over ‘need to promote narrative of peace' before Omagh bomb

Independent24-06-2025
There is concern among Omagh bomb victims that a need to 'promote the narrative of peace' in Northern Ireland in 1998 may have resulted in a 'light touch' being adopted towards terrorists.
The Omagh Bombing Inquiry also heard concerns that the policing of terrorism in Northern Ireland at the time was not as effective as that in England.
The Real IRA bomb in the Co Tyrone town in August 1998 killed 29 people, including a woman who was pregnant with twins, in the worst single atrocity in the Troubles in Northern Ireland.
The bomb exploded months after the Good Friday Agreement was signed, largely bringing an end to decades of political violence in the region.
The inquiry heard a statement from Hugh Southey on behalf of victims represented by solicitor John Fox.
They included the families of Aiden Gallagher, Ann McCombe, Fred and Bryan White, Avril and Maura Monaghan, Oran Doherty, Shaun McLaughlin, Jolene Marlow, James Barker, Brian McCrory, Rocio Abad Ramos, Sean McGrath, Geraldine Breslin, Mary Grimes and Esther Gibson, who were all killed in the massacre, as well as several other people who were injured.
Mr Southey told the inquiry it was 'possible that politics had an influence on security activities' in 1998.
He said: 'In simple terms there is a concern that the need to promote a narrative of peace may have resulted in a light touch being adopted to terrorist activity.'
The barrister continued: 'A key issue is whether there was a decision to relax security that was inappropriate and contributed to the bomb.
'There is a linked issue as to whether any flawed decision was political.'
Mr Southey said there was a clear desire from his clients for the public inquiry to 'conduct a thorough and comprehensive review of the circumstances surrounding the Omagh bomb'.
He said: 'In a real sense this may be the last opportunity for a cathartic, healing process.'
Mr Southey said there was a need for the inquiry to investigate 'differential policing'.
He said: 'What I mean by that is was the policing of terrorism in Northern Ireland as effective as that in England?
'Preparedness for warning calls is an aspect of this. Did England have more effective procedures to respond to bomb threats?
'The Army had regularly been called upon during bomb alerts, as it possessed a range of expertise, including bomb disposal expertise.
'However on August 15 1998 they were not deployed into Omagh following warnings being issued.'
He added: 'This raises the question of why the Army were not deployed on the day of the bomb and what was the protocol governing their attendance.
'Victims and survivors submit that an aspect of preventability was whether a decision not to deploy the Army was or should have been influenced by intelligence and other material suggesting a threat.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Former government minister delivers verdict on Nigel Farage as PM
Former government minister delivers verdict on Nigel Farage as PM

The Independent

time25 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Former government minister delivers verdict on Nigel Farage as PM

Michael Gove has asserted that Nigel Farage is not a 'plausible prime minister ' and will not be ready for the role even in four years. The senior Conservative minister praised Farage's communication skills but questioned Reform 's team, policies, and programme for effective governance. Gove suggested Reform 's recent electoral success is due to being a 'repository of anger' against the political classes, rather than offering a compelling vision. He also described Farage as a 'bulwark against greater extremism' and recalled helping him resolve an issue with The Times newspaper.

What are the pros and cons of introducing digital identity cards?
What are the pros and cons of introducing digital identity cards?

The Independent

time25 minutes ago

  • The Independent

What are the pros and cons of introducing digital identity cards?

The prime minister is said to be 'seriously considering' a national system of digital identification, both to make it easier to access online services, including government ones, and to clamp down on illegal working by irregular migrants. Given the push to introduce artificial intelligence in so many areas of our lives, it may be an idea whose time has come. But there are political, as well as practical, complications. What is digital ID? It would in essence be a virtual ID card, and using it in the existing, and enhanced, Government Gateway would make it easier for people to manage everything from tax records and social security entitlements to driving licences, education, citizenship and probate – a vast array of areas in which the individual has dealings with the state. It could also be used, as a passport or driving licence is now, to help with all sorts of other activities, such as banking or getting a job. There is a separate, and obviously sensitive, question about whether digital ID should also encompass someone's medical history, voluntarily or otherwise. Why digital ID now? According to the briefings, the aim is to reduce the cost and increase the efficiency of the government machine, so that, for example, people don't have to spend hours on hold when contacting a government agency. Unavoidably, though, it is also a way to detect people who shouldn't be in the country or working in the UK. That, the theory goes, means less of a 'pull factor' for certain sorts of migrant. Would it work? In a sense it is working already, in that almost everyone must have a unique tax reference, a national insurance number, a driving licence number, an NHS number and so on, and can, if they wish, share this information with others. But at the moment the system is compartmentalised and clunky, even if more and more interactions are taking place online and with chatbots. What stage are we at? Reports emanating from a 'senior minister' say that the prime minister has ordered a 'comprehensive and expansive look' at the proposal: 'Keir is leading on it,' they said. 'This is a serious piece of work. After a year in government, it is clear that technology is underpinning everything. Digital ID is foundational. Things are moving forward.' Didn't we have identity cards before? They were introduced as plain cardboard documents during the Second World War as a national security measure. People had to use them to get rationed food and petrol, and had to be ready to produce them on demand, a serious infringement of the traditional British way of doing things. The request for 'Papers, please' has always been regarded as an alien phenomenon. In the words of Boris Johnson in 2004: 'If I am ever asked, on the streets of London, or in any other venue, public or private, to produce my ID card as evidence that I am who I say I am ... then I will take that card out of my wallet and physically eat it in the presence of whatever emanation of the state has demanded that I produce it.' (He subsequently brought in compulsory photo ID for elections.) Even now, a driver stopped by the police is granted 14 days to produce their driving licence at a police station. The wartime measures were resented, and were abolished in 1952. Mandatory ID would be a minor revolution. What about the ID cards Tony Blair wanted? He still does, by the way. Much of the present momentum for change comes from the Tony Blair Institute (TBI), as if the former PM has never given up the struggle. At any rate, the current prime minister's chief aide, Morgan McSweeney, commissioned the TBI to produce proposals, and is said to be 'forceful' in making the case for them to No 10. Certainly, a more primitive version of this project was very much 'on the cards 20 years ago' when the Blair administration tried to bring in ID cards, but it ran into enormous resistance and administrative problems. The motives, in essence, were no different from today. In 2003, the then home secretary, David Blunkett, argued that cards with biometric data were needed so that 'people don't work if they are not entitled to work, they don't draw on services which are free in this country, including health, unless they are entitled to', and that 'when we find people we can identify quickly that they are not entitled and get them out'. When a limited, entirely voluntary ID card was introduced in 2010, some 15,000 were in circulation, but the incoming Conservative-Liberal Democrat government scrapped the entire scheme, after £5bn had been spent. A voluntary biometric residence permit is available as an option for foreign students or workers. Official photo ID cards for voting have also been introduced in recent years. What does the opposition say? Despite showing little interest in it while in government, earlier this year the shadow home secretary, Chris Philp, conceded that digital ID could help tackle 'illegal' immigration. But Nigel Farage remains stubbornly libertarian, and opposes digital ID because he 'doesn't trust this government' and claims that it 'hurts law-abiding citizens'. Labour, and the Tories, could use his reluctance to argue that, given he is not prepared to use every possible measure in the fight against irregular migration, Farage wouldn't succeed in his own ambition to stop the boats. Will it happen? With 40 Labour backbenchers recently calling for change and the Conservatives warming to the idea, alongside the trend towards digitising everything, it feels pretty inevitable, like it or not. Will it work? To some extent, but there are ways to get around any system, and digital is no different from paper in that respect. It could make things worse for some. If a fraudster managed to 'steal' a vulnerable person's digital ID, for example, then it would be 'open sesame' on their entire life, and comprehensive identity theft might become more common. Leaks cannot be ruled out. There's also the grim possibility that a migrant who wanted to come to the UK to work, deprived of any ID, would just melt into the underground economy, and become even more exposed to crime and exploitation. In a worst-case scenario, some criminals or a malign foreign government could execute a mega-hack in which millions of people's data is stolen or frozen and held to ransom. Last, we must reflect on British governments' past lamentable record on grand digital integration schemes – and the fact that the current proposal, which would potentially bring together HMRC, the DWP, the DVLA, the Passport Office, criminal records, local authority records, and the NHS database, would be hugely more ambitious, and hazardous, than anything attempted before.

Tributes paid to dad who died during Oasis gig in Wembley
Tributes paid to dad who died during Oasis gig in Wembley

The Independent

time25 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Tributes paid to dad who died during Oasis gig in Wembley

Lee Claydon, a father from Bournemouth, tragically died after falling from an upper tier balcony during an Oasis concert at Wembley Stadium on Saturday night. Described as a 'loving family man' and 'role model' to his son, his brother Aaron Claydon paid tribute, stating the family is devastated by the unexpected loss. A GoFundMe page has been established by his brother to provide financial and emotional support to Lee's partner, Amanda, and their family. The Metropolitan Police are investigating the incident and have appealed for witnesses or anyone with mobile phone footage to assist their inquiry. Both Wembley Stadium officials and the Gallagher brothers expressed their shock and sadness following the concert-goer's death.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store