Starmer urges renewed efforts on legacy as MP condemns Clonoe ambush ruling
Sir Keir Starmer has said the Government needs to 'renew efforts' on tackling legacy issues, when asked about a court ruling that SAS soldiers were not justified in killing four IRA members in a 1992 ambush in Co Tyrone.
Conservative former minister Sir David Davis described such rulings as 'partisan parodies of justice'.
Last month coroner Mr Justice Michael Humphreys found that the soldiers did not have an honest belief in the necessity of using lethal force.
Four Provisional IRA members – Kevin Barry O'Donnell, 21, Sean O'Farrell, 23, Peter Clancy, 19, and Daniel Vincent, 20 – were shot dead by the soldiers minutes after they had carried out a gun attack on Coalisland RUC station in February 1992.
Sir David said during Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons: 'Four weeks ago, the Northern Ireland coroner accused British soldiers of unlawful killing after they engaged with IRA would-be murderers.
'After careful reading, as far as I can see, this judgment is based on no evidence whatsoever.
'Over 100 Special Forces soldiers have been summoned before these inquiries, not one IRA leader has been summoned.
'Soldiers that serve our country with honour, heroism and skill are being punished in their declining years for doing nothing but carrying out their patriotic duty.'
He added: 'Does (Prime Minister Sir Keir) not think that he and his Government have a duty to protect these soldiers from such partisan parodies of justice?'
Sir Keir declined to comment specifically on the findings of the Clonoe inquest, saying he has not 'seen the details'.
The Prime Minister said: 'On the broader point, it's right that we should protect those who serve our country, wherever they serve our country, getting the balance right is critically important.
'I didn't think that the legislation that was put forward by the party opposite achieved that but nonetheless, I do believe that in the interests of everybody in Northern Ireland, all those who served and all those who are victims, we do need to renew our efforts to find a way forward on this really important issue.'
In his ruling Mr Justice Humphreys said that no attempt was made by the soldiers to arrest any of the members of the IRA unit and the operation was not planned and controlled in a way to minimise to the 'greatest extent possible' the need to use lethal force.
He said that in his statement, one of the soldiers claimed he opened fire when he believed those in the lorry were about to open fire on the patrol, however, he found that the IRA members were attempting to descend the lorry and run away and they could not have posed a threat.
It found that one of those killed – Mr O'Donnell – was shot in the back while attempting to flee and then again in the face while lying incapacitated on the ground.
In February First Minister Michelle O'Neill, who grew up in Clonoe, welcomed the judgment and said it 'confirmed what the community already knew'.
Responding to Tory and Reform MPs who have criticised the ruling previously, she said: 'These were Tories that were prepared to protect those in the British government, at the highest echelons of the British government, that actually killed Irish citizens.
'So I don't think we'll take any lectures from any of the Tories in London.'
The Labour Government is committed to repealing the Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act 2023.
The Act, introduced by the former Conservative government, halted scores of civil cases and inquests and proposed conditional immunity for perpetrators of Troubles crimes in exchange for their co-operation with a new truth recovery body.
The Act was opposed by victims' groups in Northern Ireland and all the main political parties at Stormont.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Edinburgh Reporter
4 minutes ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Ambitious £35m redevelopment plan for George Street supported by councillors
An ambitious £35m redevelopment plan for George Street has been supported by councillors, as concerns were raised that securing funding for it might not be possible. Edinburgh's transport convener said 'vast benefits', including improved safety, sustainability and accessibility, would result from the street's transformation. A decision on the project was made in May of this year. But at a meeting on Thursday, councillors reaffirmed that support, and agreed on a preference for the most expansive – and expensive – version. Coming in at an estimated £35 million, the project will see George Street transformed, with the street being completely closed to traffic for most of the day. Planters, natural stone setts and eight trees will be installed, as will benches, in hopes of making the street a better place to congregate. In addition, 'hostile vehicle mitigation' – in the case of George Street, retractable bollards – will be installed to help prevent vehicle attacks on the space. They will also be used to close off the roadway to most traffic, with a small subset of vehicles only being allowed in at certain times. Six of the 11 councillors in the Transport and Environment Committee voted to pursue the most ambitious plan. The two Conservative members of the committee voted against funding any redevelopment, and instead wanted to see £10m put towards road maintenance on George Street, funded by road parking charges. Earlier in the meeting, Conservative councillor for the City Centre ward Joanna Mowat addressed the committee, expressing concerns over the scheme's practicality. Currently, the plan is to fund the bulk of the project's price tag through grants from various public bodies, and possibly use some money from the city's upcoming visitor levy. She said: 'Here we are again, talking about George Street. We've been talking for nearly 11 years now. 'The elephant in the room is that we still don't have any money, and are reliant on applying to third parties and having this money granted to us before we can put a shovel in the ground. 'I think the position we've got to, looking at the wider financial situation across the council, Scotland, and the UK, is we've no money, and we need to look at what money we have, and what we can do.' The committee's SNP group wanted to see more detailed information about the costs of the project presented to councillors, but their amendment was not supported. Details of their amendment that asked for more frequent updates and for the committee to be provided with several options for traffic restrictions along the street were included in the final version of the motion. In addition, the Green group's amendment, which requires that a two-way cycle route be included along the street during construction, and a Liberal Democrat amendment which asked councillors to ensure the hostile vehicle mitigation portion of the project was retained, were both passed. If adequate external funding for the project cannot be found, councillors will be able to scale back to one of several less ambitious options for the project. With the decision on Thursday, city officers will now start seeking the necessary traffic regulation orders required to enable construction to start. If funding is found, work is set to begin in autumn 2027. Labour councillor and Transport and Environment Committee convener Stephen Jenkinson said: 'I'm really pleased that we've taken the decision today to move forward with the George Street and First New Town project. 'The project is rooted in making the area safer, more sustainable and accessible for all. 'This is a unique opportunity to bring one of Edinburgh's most important streets into the modern world whilst still maintaining its unique history and features. 'The wider potential improvements are vast, from benefits to local residents and businesses to enhancing Edinburgh as a visitor destination, and beyond – we're on our way to delivering a bold new vision for George Street and our city centre. 'Whilst we're committed to this important project, we're also committed to making broader improvements across the city for the benefit of all our residents.' By Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter Like this: Like Related
Daily Mirror
16 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
'I was hospitalised with a panic attack after DWP cuts news - I was frantic'
Lorraine Griffin, from Dudley, was hospitalised with a panic attack when the cuts to welfare benefits were announced earlier this year as she feared the impact on her sons A mum of two children with autism has said it is 'unthinkable' to think about how her family will suffer if they can't access vital disability benefits. Lorraine Griffin, from Dudley, was hospitalised with a panic attack when the cuts to welfare benefits were announced earlier this year. 'I was absolutely frantic because in your head, it's the worst case scenario, isn't it? Suddenly your bit of stability can just vanish, go up in smoke. It's awful. 'I'm not just talking for me. I'm talking about all the other families that I know so well, in school, in my autism groups, lots of Facebook groups, I'm talking for them too." Her sons Sam, 13, and Ben, 12, currently receive the medium and high amounts of Disability Living Allowance. But the boys will have to apply for the under-threat Personal Independence Payments when they turn 16. 'We do rely on that money for their needs... I can't even fathom in my head, not qualifying for PIP. Just because we get disability finances and disability benefits, we're not rolling in it. We're not mega rich. It doesn't mean that at all. 'It just means that that money is there for us with our everyday needs.' Lorraine said she currently needs the extra money to pay for anything from medication to clothing to taxis. She said her son Ben won't wear clothing so she has to buy leotards from a specialist website which cost an 'absolute fortune'. If their benefits were cut, she said 'a whole range of things would have to go'. 'It's unthinkable to be honest,' she added. The 53-year-old said the Government was "picking on the most vulnerable, the disabled, for goodness sake. She said: "I can't believe it.' Lorraine is pleading with Keir Starmer to hit the 'pause button' on his PIP changes. 'I hope that they see sense and just press the pause button and have another look and have another think and see what they can do. I really hope so. 'Obviously they've all got constituents like me, they need to listen, don't they, and take into consideration what it means for us. I really hope they do.'
Daily Mirror
18 minutes ago
- Daily Mirror
'DWP disability benefit cuts could become Labour's poll tax moment'
It's with a heavy heart that I write about the Government's proposed Welfare Reform Bill. The planned cuts to Personal Independence Payments (PIP) are already turning the lives of some of the most vulnerable people in Britain into a nightmare of fear and uncertainty. These changes are not the way forward. Moreover, they are certainly not remotely helpful to those who rely on PIP to live with dignity and independence. We cannot claim to be a democratic and inclusive society if we punish people for circumstances beyond their control, while pretending we are levelling the playing field. These cuts do not fix a broken system — they make it worse. In my Bradford East constituency, where half of all children are growing up in poverty, I hear first-hand from constituents who are terrified they may lose their PIP support. The sense of panic is real. And so is the damage. Let's be honest with ourselves: PIP supports people with serious physical or mental health needs — people who often require help to cut their food, to wash, or to go to the toilet. These are not luxuries. They are necessities. And losing that support would strip away the last threads of independence and dignity that people have. The anxiety is palpable. People already feel pushed to the brink. Now, they fear falling off it altogether. These reforms may have been presented with good intentions, but they place us on a road that leads straight back to austerity and failure. They are not guided by a moral compass, but by the cold calculations of a Treasury spreadsheet — the same spreadsheet that failed to anticipate the human impact of scrapping the Winter Fuel Allowance. Let me be absolutely clear: these cuts are not the Labour way. If passed it will lead to extreme poverty for the most vulnerable in its tracks. That's why I have joined more than 100 Labour MPs in signing a reasoned amendment to stop this unjust legislation in its tracks. I urge the Government to heed the warnings of Labour MPs, disability rights campaigners, and charities. If they do not, we risk walking straight into a political disaster — one that could become Labour's poll tax moment. We must learn the lessons of the Winter Fuel U-turn. When it was clear the policy was wrong, we changed course. We must do the same here. Because let's be honest - we all know this is wrong. It is wrong to persecute those most in need. It is wrong to target people with mental health conditions. It is wrong to attack the most vulnerable. Follow our Mirror Politics account on Bluesky here. And follow our Mirror Politics team here - Lizzy Buchan, Mikey Smith, Kevin Maguire, Sophie Huskisson, Dave Burke and Ashley Cowburn. Be first to get the biggest bombshells and breaking news by joining our Politics WhatsApp group here. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you want to leave our community, you can check out any time you like. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. Or sign up here to the Mirror's Politics newsletter for all the best exclusives and opinions straight to your inbox. And listen to our exciting new political podcast The Division Bell, hosted by the Mirror and the Express every Thursday. That is why I will not vote for this Bill. Because stripping away vital support is not the way to build a fairer society. The Government must rethink these damaging proposals, reject further cuts to disability benefits, and focus instead on raising living standards and protecting those most at risk. There are clear and fair alternatives available. The Government could raise funds through a simple two per cent wealth tax on the super-rich — which could raise £24 billion a year-would put The burden on the broadest shoulders, while protecting those most in need. It could continue to invest in jobs, infrastructure and public services to revitalise the economy after 14 years of Tory decline. Instead, this Bill targets those least able to fight back. It sows fear, breeds injustice, and abandons principle. If we continue down this path, we risk repeating the mistakes of the past — and creating a defining failure of this Government.
