Troubles legacy cost £601m so far, think tank says
The figures from the Policy Exchange think tank are based on 2024 prices and includes money already spent on inquiries, inquests, court cases and investigations.It also estimates that the ongoing cost of legacy issues is anywhere from £238m - £739m.
Future figures 'entirely speculative'
There are caveats with the report's figures.The more than £2bn projected past and future cost breaks down into roughly £1bn previous spend and £1bn forecast spend.The previous spend includes the Bloody Sunday Inquiry from 2010, the cost of which has been increased by about £100m by building in inflation and converting it to 2024 values.The report also includes aspects of police, Northern Ireland Office and Police Ombudsman budgets, which it could be argued is necessary spending and a £514m proposal for bereavement payments, which has not been approved and is not in Stormont's programme for government.The Northern Ireland Executive has been asked for comment.The report's authors have also estimated the future cost of the Omagh Bombing Inquiry and the public inquiry into the killing of Pat Finucane, as well as potential compensation to former Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams, which the government has not yet approved.A UK government spokesperson told BBC News NI: "We do not recognise the basis of the figures for any future costs in this report, which are entirely speculative."
'Legalist approach'
The think tank has criticised the government for repealing parts of the previous administration's Legacy Act.In a foreword to the paper, former Conservative Chancellor Jeremy Hunt says: "If the additional sums being committed by this government to legacy matters were genuinely helping to bring about peace and reconciliation, the country would pay them cheerfully."But there is scant evidence that this is the case; indeed, scant evidence that such factors are even being considered. "Rather, the approach to legacy appears at times to be being dictated by a maximalist approach to legalism, without regard to the underlying benefits or costs."
'Nobody takes cost into account'
One of the authors of the report is historian and former Ulster Unionist councillor Jeffrey Dudgeon."Part of the problem now is that judges are ordering inquiries that will cost enormous amounts of money and they don't get asked in advance who will pay for the inquiry," Mr Dudgeon told the Good Morning Ulster programme."In England, judges have to take costs into account and here I've never been aware of any judicial inquiry being costed in advance."They've become politically motivated, they're not actually about the needs of bereaved families and the truth."He added: "Nobody takes cost into account in Northern Ireland, possibly because other people are going to have to pay for it."
'The reality of amnesties'
Mr Dudgeon said he understood the idea of amnesties was hurtful for victims.However, he said there had been few convictions for Troubles offences over the last 25 years."None of the political parties offered an alternative to the Legacy Act," he said"It's a standard act of government to put the past behind us and try and move forward."People are frightened here in Northern Ireland by the reality of amnesties."A UK government spokesperson told BBC News NI they are "committed to addressing the suffering of victims and survivors of the Troubles" in a way that is human rights compliant and proportionate. "The previous government set aside £250m over five years for the independent Commission and other legacy mechanisms and this government remains committed to that figure," they said.The UK government is examining "all conceivable options" to lawfully address any potential compensation claims relating to historic Interim Custody Orders, they added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
6 hours ago
- Times
Britain needs more council houses
Britain's doomsters and gloomsters may have other contenders — the cost of living, healthcare, immigration — but the Policy Exchange think tank certainly has a case that 'the housing crisis remains arguably the most acute and intractable socio-economic crisis facing the United Kingdom today'. It has caused not just a divide between rich and poor but an intergenerational one, with all kinds of deleterious effects: reduced labour mobility, delays starting families, social exclusion. A chronic shortage of houses has left property increasingly unaffordable. As the think tank points out: 'In 1970, the average house in London was four times higher than the average salary.' Today, with prices averaging £510,000, it's 14 times. On top, it's not merely a question of getting on the ladder; rents too have rocketed. Of course, building more houses would help. Yet since Tony Blair brought in the much-repeated 300,000-a-year target in 2004, guess how many times it's been hit? Answer: precisely none, not by Labour or the Tories. This government is proving no exception. And even then, what about the mix? A chunk of new housing is meant to be 'affordable', but we're not building enough of that stuff either; it's hardly a priority for private developers. And, as the think tank puts it, the definition — 'no more than 80 per cent of market rates' — is for many 'spurious' too. They can't afford that either. Hence, its big idea: Building Beautiful Council Houses, the title of a new Policy Exchange report by Ike Ijeh. It advocates 100,000 a year. And yes, 'beautiful' does sound a bit Trumpian, even if the sentiment is valid; new council homes need to be 'high quality' and integrated into local communities, not the sort of thing that creates grim ghettos. Still, isn't there a case for reversing the damage from Margaret Thatcher's 'Right to Buy' — the programme that sold off Britain's council housing stock, which successive governments have failed to replace? Go back to 1969 and council houses were 28 per cent of the total, a figure down to 6 per cent by 2023. It's a decline that has been accompanied, too, by the hollowing out of local authorities' ability to build new homes: just 2 per cent of the total in 2022, versus nearly 70 per cent in 1954. No one's suggesting going back to that, or 1979's level of council homes: 5.1 million versus 1.5 million today. But building more could boost the whole market. First, it would stop new homes being the preserve of the big private housebuilders — a crew focused on making a profit out of balancing supply and demand, not hitting government targets for new homes. Second, it could revitalise smaller, local builders, working in partnership with councils. Third, it could push down rents, also giving tenants more scope to save up for a deposit to buy their own home. Yet how do you pay for it? Well, one result of our dysfunctional market is that Britain now spends £25 billion a year on housing benefit, paid to private landlords — a figure that the think tank reckons will 'balloon' to £70 billion-plus by 2050. Instead of subsidising them, money could be better spent on 'a new generation of council properties', with an obligation to replace each one sold via Right to Buy. On top, a levy on all new infrastructure developments could help finance new council houses. Sure, there are obstacles to all this. Local authorities don't yet have the funds or skills to build 100,000 new council homes a year — and the big developers will focus on more profitable stuff. People will also argue that if immigration was under control, Britain wouldn't need so many new homes anyway. Still, when it comes to fixing the UK's housing crisis, more council houses should be part of the foundations. Pit a rottweiler against a chihuahua in a fight and there's typically only one winner. So the big puzzler is how the $130 billion KKR (and its chums from infrastructure firm Stonepeak) managed to get thumped by the £1.25 billion Primary Health Properties in the set-to for Assura. As Shore Capital analyst Andrew Saunders put it, 'there are not many examples in M&A history where the underdog has come out on top', suggesting it was proof of the old adage that it's more about 'the size of fight in the dog than size of dog in the fight'. He's right, too, to 'congratulate' PHP chairman Harry Hyman and chief executive Mark Davies on their victorious scrap: 63 per cent acceptances for their £1.7 billion cash and shares bid. They saw KKR was trying to buy rival healthcare property group Assura on the cheap, a bottom-of-the-cycle cash bid at no premium to net asset value. And that investors didn't want out of a sector enjoying political oomph: £29 billion a year extra for the NHS, with a shift to more primary care boosting the value of buildings housing GP surgeries. PHP just needed to give them a convincing reason to stay in. Yet KKR and its adviser Jefferies also made a huge tactical blunder. They made their bid 'best and final' too early, leaving them zero room for manoeuvre once PHP raised its offer. One result? Friday's desperate attempt to trash it, which required three corrections from the Takeover Panel. It was a sign even they knew their bid was going to the dogs. A tenfold share price rise since January 2023 would be enough for most chief executives. Not Rolls-Royce's Tufan Erginbilgic. He told the BBC that the company has the 'potential' to be UK No 1, implying a doubling of its £92 billion market cap to AstraZeneca's £177 billion. How come? Rolls's as-yet unproven mini-nukes. Yeah, the market didn't fall for it either. Rolls shares fell by almost 1 per cent.
Telegraph
7 hours ago
- Telegraph
Prioritise beauty in new council homes ‘to avoid repeat of 1960s eyesores'
Beauty must be a priority for new council homes to avoid a repeat of the 'eyesore' housing estates of the 1960s, a report has said. New-builds should be designed with consideration for aesthetic appeal to avoid more 'concrete eyesores', Policy Exchange recommended. Labour MPs and a former communities secretary under Tony Blair backed the think tank's 35-point blueprint for attractive social housing. It warned Angela Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister, not to allow a repeat of the 'design failure' of council housing in the 1950s and 1960s. The think tank wrote: 'Half a century later, many of these homes and estates have been or are in the process of being pulled down because they became totemic symbols of design failure, municipal mismanagement, antisocial malignancy and socioeconomic hopelessness. 'Many of these problems came down to design and to this day, in the minds of many, the words 'council estate' still summon a caustic cocktail of urban deprivation and dystopian collapse. ' Concrete eyesores, crumbling tower blocks, abandoned open spaces, threatening alleyways, smashed windows, graffiti, drugs, refuse, crime, all of which promoted a sinking social spiral that actively suppressed the feelings of ownership and responsibility on which the communal residential condition relies.' In 2024, Ms Rayner, who is also Housing Secretary, removed the requirement for 'beautiful' buildings from national planning rules, which she described as 'ridiculous'. She has promised to deliver 300,000 new social and affordable homes with a fund of £39bn. Ruth Kelly, a former communities secretary under Tony Blair, backed the proposals and urged Ms Rayner to 'wrench beauty from being solely a preserve of the rich to being an egalitarian human and social commodity to which we are all entitled'. Recommendations in the report included making new-builds more colourful to counter the 'grey aesthetic that is common to concrete' used in post-war and Brutalist council flats. It also suggested that architects should employ curves to 'soften and humanise' buildings and to counteract the 'boxes with holes' image of London tower blocks. Council housing should include large windows and be built to 'human scale', which means constructing buildings that feel less intimidating in size, the report suggested. 'Mid-rise is often best primed to achieve optimum residential densities, as the fact that low-rise European cities like Paris and Barcelona tend to have substantially higher densities than British cities where, in recent years at least, high-rises have flourished,' it said. Kevin Hollinrake, the former shadow housing secretary who is now the Conservative Party chairman, said: 'There is no solution to the housing crisis unless we are committed to building beautiful, inspiring and affordable homes.' Margaret Mullane, the Labour MP for Dagenham and Rainham in east London, said: 'This is a timely contribution to the growing discussion around sustainable place-making which, given the new Government's housing ambitions, will prove crucial to ensure we build communities where people can put down roots and thrive.'
BBC News
15 hours ago
- BBC News
Schools targeted in 'simply untrue' online campaign
Claims that some schools in Northern Ireland are asking pupils to write Valentine's cards to refugees or asylum seekers are "entirely inaccurate".That is according to the Education Authority (EA), which facilitates the School of Sanctuary scheme in Northern Ireland.A widely-circulated social media post claimed that, as part of the scheme, schools were getting children to write Valentine's Day cards to adult named a number of schools in Northern Ireland who took part in the scheme. What is the School of Sanctuary Scheme? The School of Sanctuary scheme - which is supported by the Northern Ireland Executive - aims to support schools to become welcoming places for all children, including newcomer children.A School of Sanctuary is one which provides significant additional support to pupils, including refugees and first in Northern Ireland was named in 2017, and over 40 have been awarded the status since John the Baptist College in Portadown recently became the first outside Belfast or Londonderry to achieve the accreditation. What have Schools of Sanctuary in Northern Ireland told parents? The principal of Integrated College, Glengormley, Ricky Massey, wrote to parents to state that the online claims were "simply not true".In his letter, Mr Massey mentioned claims on social media that Schools of Sanctuary "are encouraging pupils to write letters or Valentine's cards to refugees or asylum seekers - including suggestions that this could involve 'unvetted men.'"He said: "I want to reassure you in the strongest possible terms, this has never happened at Integrated College Glengormley." He said they school has never been asked or instructed by any organisation to carry out such activities."This would never happen," he Massey said safeguarding and child protection was at the "heart of everything" they do."The welfare of our pupils is our first priority, and any activity in our school is subject to the highest safeguarding standards."Please be assured - there is no cause for anxiety about your child's wellbeing in relation to these claims," he said. 'Genuinely held concerns' Taughmonagh Primary School in Belfast also sent a letter to parents of pupils, telling them that social media "information circulating in relation to our school is factually incorrect"."We would ask for our school community's support in stopping the spread of misinformation online," the letter letter outlined how the school has stringent safeguarding processes and this allegation on the Facebook group is "contrary to our policies".The Belfast DUP councillor Sarah Bunting criticised what she called "the spreading of these online rumours, made up and posted by faceless, nameless strangers". What has the EA and School of Sanctuary said? In a statement to BBC News NI, the EA said it was aware that some schools had been targeted online. "We consider this information to be entirely inaccurate and condemn the spread of misinformation in the strongest terms," the statement of Sanctuary UK said it was "not directly involved in the delivery of specific activities in schools".It said that while there had been "mention of a Valentine's Day welcome card initiative," where children wrote anonymised messages of welcome to people seeking safety, "we have full confidence that schools and teachers organise age-appropriate activities and follow rigorous safeguarding procedures to ensure every child's safety during such activities".
