Labour accused of ‘two tier justice' over legal aid for Gerry Adams
The Government has been accused of 'two tier justice' over legal aid for Gerry Adams.
Earlier this year it was revealed that Mr Adams, the former Sinn Fein president, would be in line for taxpayer-funded compensation because of Sir Keir Starmer's decision to repeal Troubles legislation.
Under current law, Mr Adams is blocked from claiming compensation over his detention in prison in the 1970s.
Sir Keir's plans will repeal the Legacy Act introduced by the Tories, which denied Mr Adams and up to 400 other IRA 'suspects' also detained in the 1970s the right to claim compensation.
The Ministry of Defence confirmed on Monday that it will seek a judicial review to challenge a coroner's ruling that could lead to SAS veterans being prosecuted for killing four IRA terrorists.
The coroner found members of an SAS unit used unjustified lethal force when they killed four IRA terrorists in an ambush at Clonoe in 1992.
The decision to commit to a judicial review came after James Cartlidge, shadow defence secretary, wrote to Al Carns, the veterans minister, asking for one.
Mark Francois, shadow defence minister, told the Commons he welcomed the review but asked: 'Why not drop the plans to revoke large parts of the Northern Ireland Legacy Act which would only serve to facilitate yet more inquests of this type?'
Mr Francois said: 'Revoking the Legacy Act would encourage a system of two tier justice. One for our army veterans and another for alleged IRA terrorists, including those who have been given so-called letters of comfort by the Blair regime.'
He asked: 'Why should a Labour government assist Gerry Adams to sue the British taxpayer? How is that supporting those who served their country valiantly [in Northern Ireland] on Operation Banner?'
Mr Carns, who served in Northern Ireland, insisted that he was working with the Northern Ireland Office to make sure anyone involved in any of the investigations gets the support they need.
It comes as ministers were urged to give British troops 'maximum protection' from 'vexatious claims' in the courts if they are deployed to Ukraine on a peacekeeping mission.
Tory MPs repeatedly pressed the Defence Secretary to confirm the Government would consider derogating from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) in the event of any deployment to remove risk of such claims.
John Healey, the Defence Secretary, stopped short of offering a specific commitment.
He did point to 2021 legislation designed to give stronger protections for service personnel and veterans facing the threat of legal proceedings in relation to events which occurred on historical overseas operations.
The UK is working on deploying troops to Ukraine as part of any peace deal as part of a so-called coalition of the willing.
Mr Cartlidge told the Commons: 'If our forces go to Ukraine it will be as part of a peacekeeping mission.
'But, as the veterans minister reminded us earlier, Operation Banner was also described as being there to keep the peace, yet decades later those who served are being hounded in our courts and, in Iraq, our soldiers were subjected to hundreds of vexatious claims.
'So, if our forces go into Ukraine, will the Secretary of State consider derogating from the ECHR so as to maximise our protection against possible lawfare?'
Mr Healey replied: 'If we go into Ukraine, we will be going into a negotiated peace not a shooting war. Our aim is to secure borders, to ensure safe skies, to ensure safe seas.
'I'd just ask the honourable gentleman, is he saying that he will not support a UK mission and UK troops without that derogation?'
'Maximum protection to our Armed Forces'
Mr Cartlidge replied 'of course not' and added: 'The Secretary of State knows perfectly well that the Labour government derogated from the ECHR after 9/11 and there's a country in Europe which has derogated from the ECHR since 2015 – that is Ukraine, it's because there's a war on.
'And surely he would recognise, even if it's a peacekeeping force, there will still be threats and Russian nationals have been particularly adept at lawfare in our own courts.
'So, I ask him, surely he will at least consider giving the maximum protection to our Armed Forces from vexatious claims by derogating from the ECHR if there is a deployment?'
Mr Healey replied: 'Our Armed Forces will always have our fullest support. Just to be clear to the honourable gentleman, we are responding now, alongside France, to put together a coalition of the willing, responding to the challenge from the US for Europe to step up on Ukraine.
'We're responding to the requirement from Ukraine for security arrangements that will give them the conviction and confidence that any negotiated peace will last.
'That is a worthy mission, it's one the UK is leading and I would hope it has the support of all sides of this House.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Guardian
18 minutes ago
- South Wales Guardian
Starmer hits back at Badenoch over grooming scandal, claiming Tories did nothing
Sir Keir Starmer asked 'why on earth' Mrs Badenoch did not bring forward a mandatory duty for authorities to report child sexual exploitation when she was a minister. 'Why didn't you do it? Why didn't you say one word about it?' he added in a message to the Opposition leader, as he spoke to reporters at the G7 summit in Canada. Sir Keir's rebuttal came after the Tory leader called a Westminster press conference, where she said was 'not doing politics now', but criticised people who sought to 'tone police those who are pointing out when something has gone wrong'. As he spoke to reporters at the summit in the Canadian Rockies, the PM also contrasted his time working as England and Wales' chief prosecutor, and his initial years as an MP when he called for mandatory reporting, with Mrs Badenoch's time in Government. 'Kemi Badenoch, I think, if I remember rightly, was the minister for children and for women, and I think the record will show that she didn't raise the question of grooming once when she was in power, not once, not one word from the dispatch box on any of this,' the Prime Minister told reporters. 'Chris Philp (the shadow home secretary), I think, went to 300-plus meetings when he was in his position in the Home Office and at not one of those meetings did he raise the question of grooming. 'So, I know there's some discussion of this 'far-right bandwagon'. I was actually calling out politicians, nobody else, politicians who in power had said and done nothing, who are now making the claims that they make.' Asked if Mrs Badenoch was now weaponising the issue, he said there used to be a time with more cross-party consensus and that the focus should be on individual victims. 'I mean, the question for Kemi Badenoch is, why on earth didn't you, you were in power, you had all the tools at your disposal. 'I was calling even then for mandatory reporting. Why didn't you do it? Why didn't you say one word about it?' Speaking at a press conference alongside grooming gang survivors and campaigners, the Conservative leader earlier said: 'I do think that we should take the politics out of it. But who was it that said when we raised this issue that we were pandering to the far right? That's what brought the politics into it.' Her comments follow an interview in which Baroness Louise Casey told the BBC she was 'disappointed' by the Opposition's response to her review of the grooming gangs scandal. She said: 'We need to change some laws, we need to do a national criminal investigation, we need to get on with a national inquiry with local footprint in it and ideally wouldn't it be great if everybody came behind that and backed you?' She added: 'I felt the Opposition could have just been a bit, you know, yes we will all come together behind you. 'Maybe there's still time to do that. I think it's just so important that they do.' Mrs Badenoch said her party did back a national inquiry into the scandal, and had been calling for one 'for six months'. Shadow home secretary Mr Philp said the Conservatives wanted the inquiry to take two years, focus on 'all 50 towns affected' and 'look at the role of ethnicity in the cover-up'. But appearing in front of the Commons Home Affairs Committee on Tuesday morning, Baroness Casey urged people to 'keep calm' on the subject of ethnicity. Baroness Casey's report, published on Monday, found the ethnicity of perpetrators had been 'shied away from', with data not recorded for two-thirds of offenders. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper told MPs that officials had dodged the issue of ethnicity among groups of sex offenders for fear of being called racist, and called for 'much more robust national data'. Baroness Casey also told the Home Affairs Committee that a national inquiry should be done within three years, rather than the two called for by the Conservatives. She believed three years would be 'achievable' to carry out the national and local inquiries. The crossbench peer also urged for local areas to 'think carefully' about not being open to scrutiny and to change. On the five local inquiries announced in January, she said 'only Oldham bit the bullet', adding: 'My understanding is nobody else volunteered for that. So that tells you something, doesn't it? It tells you something, and it doesn't tell you something I certainly would want to hear if I was a victim.' A Downing Street spokesman said the format and chairperson of the inquiry would be set out at a later date, adding that it would have the power to compel people to give evidence. He added that the Government had accepted all of Baroness Casey's recommendations, including making it mandatory for the police to collect data on the ethnicity of suspects.
South Wales Argus
18 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Starmer hits back at Badenoch over grooming scandal, claiming Tories did nothing
Sir Keir Starmer asked 'why on earth' Mrs Badenoch did not bring forward a mandatory duty for authorities to report child sexual exploitation when she was a minister. 'Why didn't you do it? Why didn't you say one word about it?' he added in a message to the Opposition leader, as he spoke to reporters at the G7 summit in Canada. Sir Keir's rebuttal came after the Tory leader called a Westminster press conference, where she said was 'not doing politics now', but criticised people who sought to 'tone police those who are pointing out when something has gone wrong'. As he spoke to reporters at the summit in the Canadian Rockies, the PM also contrasted his time working as England and Wales' chief prosecutor, and his initial years as an MP when he called for mandatory reporting, with Mrs Badenoch's time in Government. 'Kemi Badenoch, I think, if I remember rightly, was the minister for children and for women, and I think the record will show that she didn't raise the question of grooming once when she was in power, not once, not one word from the dispatch box on any of this,' the Prime Minister told reporters. 'Chris Philp (the shadow home secretary), I think, went to 300-plus meetings when he was in his position in the Home Office and at not one of those meetings did he raise the question of grooming. 'So, I know there's some discussion of this 'far-right bandwagon'. I was actually calling out politicians, nobody else, politicians who in power had said and done nothing, who are now making the claims that they make.' Asked if Mrs Badenoch was now weaponising the issue, he said there used to be a time with more cross-party consensus and that the focus should be on individual victims. 'I mean, the question for Kemi Badenoch is, why on earth didn't you, you were in power, you had all the tools at your disposal. 'I was calling even then for mandatory reporting. Why didn't you do it? Why didn't you say one word about it?' Speaking at a press conference alongside grooming gang survivors and campaigners, the Conservative leader earlier said: 'I do think that we should take the politics out of it. But who was it that said when we raised this issue that we were pandering to the far right? That's what brought the politics into it.' Her comments follow an interview in which Baroness Louise Casey told the BBC she was 'disappointed' by the Opposition's response to her review of the grooming gangs scandal. She said: 'We need to change some laws, we need to do a national criminal investigation, we need to get on with a national inquiry with local footprint in it and ideally wouldn't it be great if everybody came behind that and backed you?' Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the national inquiry into grooming gangs should take no more than two years (Lucy North/PA) She added: 'I felt the Opposition could have just been a bit, you know, yes we will all come together behind you. 'Maybe there's still time to do that. I think it's just so important that they do.' Mrs Badenoch said her party did back a national inquiry into the scandal, and had been calling for one 'for six months'. Shadow home secretary Mr Philp said the Conservatives wanted the inquiry to take two years, focus on 'all 50 towns affected' and 'look at the role of ethnicity in the cover-up'. But appearing in front of the Commons Home Affairs Committee on Tuesday morning, Baroness Casey urged people to 'keep calm' on the subject of ethnicity. Baroness Louise Casey urged people to 'keep calm' on drawing conclusions from data on the ethnicity of perpetrators (House of Commons/UK Parliament/PA) Baroness Casey's report, published on Monday, found the ethnicity of perpetrators had been 'shied away from', with data not recorded for two-thirds of offenders. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper told MPs that officials had dodged the issue of ethnicity among groups of sex offenders for fear of being called racist, and called for 'much more robust national data'. Baroness Casey also told the Home Affairs Committee that a national inquiry should be done within three years, rather than the two called for by the Conservatives. She believed three years would be 'achievable' to carry out the national and local inquiries. The crossbench peer also urged for local areas to 'think carefully' about not being open to scrutiny and to change. On the five local inquiries announced in January, she said 'only Oldham bit the bullet', adding: 'My understanding is nobody else volunteered for that. So that tells you something, doesn't it? It tells you something, and it doesn't tell you something I certainly would want to hear if I was a victim.' A Downing Street spokesman said the format and chairperson of the inquiry would be set out at a later date, adding that it would have the power to compel people to give evidence. He added that the Government had accepted all of Baroness Casey's recommendations, including making it mandatory for the police to collect data on the ethnicity of suspects.
South Wales Guardian
18 minutes ago
- South Wales Guardian
Government recognises financial challenge in mitigating two-child cap
Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said applications will open for mitigation of the welfare policy on March 2, with payments being made 'as soon as possible' afterwards – meaning it will likely take place just ahead of the Scottish Parliament election. She said the move will lift 20,000 children out of relative poverty, according to Scottish Government estimates. However the minister also told MSPs she is 'deeply disappointed' that Scotland's interim child poverty targets have not been met, saying there is no single reason for them being missed. Plans to mitigate the two-child cap were first announced last year but First Minister John Swinney said his Government needed time to set up the system. Introduced under the Conservatives, the two-child cap limits benefits in most cases to the first two children born after April 2017. Labour has cited fiscal constraints for keeping the cap, but in May the Prime Minister said he will be 'looking at all options' to tackle child poverty. Ms Somerville said Scotland cannot wait for a decision at Westminster and implementing it in March – 15 months after the initial announcement – will be the fastest a new social security has even been introduced in Scotland. Following an announcement on Tuesday morning, Ms Somerville addressed MSPs on the Government's 'tackling child poverty delivery plan'. She said it is 'deeply disappointing' that interim child poverty targets have not been met, but rates are nevertheless coming down, and she pledged to 'build on that progress' ahead of 2030 targets. Conservative MSP Liz Smith pressed the minister on how the mitigation policy will be funded, saying the Scottish Fiscal Commission (SFC) has noted a 'widening gap' between the Scottish Government's welfare spending and its funding. She said: 'Can I ask where the other cuts will be made to pay for that mitigation?' Ms Somerville said her Government is 'resolute' in tackling economic inactivity, saying people should not be punished for having children. Decisions from the UK Government have pushed more people into poverty, she claimed. Discussing the SFC's forecasts, she said: 'Those are choices that we have taken – to ensure that we are protecting disabled people and children. 'Because we need to protect them from the effects of poverty. 'Those are decisions which will obviously be set out in the work that is being taken forward by the Cabinet Secretary for Finance as we look to the sustainability of our finances. 'We recognise that challenge.' She said the 'easiest way to deal with that challenge' would be for the UK Government to scrap the two-child cap and proposals to cut disabled benefits. Scottish Labour's Paul O'Kane said: 'For all the rhetoric we've had from the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary after 18 years in office, relative child poverty after housing costs has only fallen by 1%. 'When the Cabinet Secretary says rates are broadly stable, what she means is that the dial hasn't shifted.' The Scottish Fiscal Commission said the mitigation will cost around £150 million next year, before rising to nearly £200 million by the end of the decade. Ms Somerville said around 43,000 children would benefit initially, rising to 50,000 by the end of the decade. In March, the Institute for Fiscal Studies warned the policy could harm incentives to work because some of the lowest-paid workers could earn more on welfare than in employment. The move has been welcomed by anti-poverty charities, who have urged the UK Government to scrap the cap, with the Child Poverty Action Group saying the move would lift 350,000 children across the UK out of poverty.
