The House of Commons (Procedure) Bill - Clause 6

Ms Cummins highlighted the procedural importance of the motion, urging Members to concentrate on the extension of the carry-over period. She also referenced a specific waiver granted by Mr Speaker regarding discussions of historical troubles-related deaths, suggesting the need for a cautious approach to sensitive issues.

Jim Shannon expressed doubt about the effectiveness of the proposed measures, citing the case of his cousin who was murdered 55 years ago and has yet to see justice. He called for genuine justice for families of victims who have been waiting for accountability for decades.

Alex Burghart requested the Secretary of State to clarify the legal meaning of the word 'essential' in the context of the amendments proposed to the Bill.

Andrew Murrison acknowledged the letter sent by the Secretary of State and the Defence Secretary to colleagues which pacified concerns. He questioned why the legislation was initially drafted in a particular way and expressed sympathy for servicemen troubled by the fear of potential prosecution.

Geoffrey Cox inquired about the substantive difference the Attorney General’s consent would make to prosecution decisions, suggesting scepticism about the proposed changes.

Alex Easton asked about the final decision-making process for who would be on the commission advisory board, ensuring that members of political parties supporting violence and paramilitaries would not be allowed on the board.

Gavin Robinson raised concerns about the Garda legacy unit failing to provide answers and information to families seeking justice. He questioned the Secretary of State on the unit's effectiveness and called for accountability from the Government of the Republic of Ireland.

Jim Shannon intervened to highlight specific cases of IRA members escaping across the border, emphasising the need for accountability and transparency from the Garda Síochána and the Government of the Republic of Ireland.

Jim Allister intervened to discuss the Omagh inquiry and the withholding of intelligence by the Dublin Government, illustrating the need for transparency and accountability in addressing past injustices.

Alex Burghart criticised the Bill for being a mess and for the lack of time allocated for proper scrutiny. He emphasised that the Bill reopens the door to vexatious litigation against those who served in Northern Ireland during the troubles.

Colum Eastwood intervened to challenge Alex Burghart for not mentioning victims in his speech and to highlight the need for accountability for those who committed crimes during Bloody Sunday.

Katrina Murray intervened to express concern for families of those who did not survive their service in Northern Ireland and the need for truth and accountability for victims and survivors.

Deirdre Costigan intervened to criticise the Conservative Party's legacy Act for not providing protection to veterans' families and called for better provisions in the current Bill.

Tonia Antoniazzi highlighted the need for the Bill to address the concerns of victims and survivors of the troubles. She emphasised the importance of resources, public confidence, and placing victims and their families at the centre of the process.

Paul Kohler criticises the legacy Act for failing veterans, communities, and victims. He highlights its detrimental impact on the Good Friday agreement and the Brexit deal, and argues that it failed to uphold the European convention on human rights, barring the pathway to justice for innocent victims and their families.

Caroline Nokes emphasises the importance of debating the Bill and its necessity for the future of peace in Northern Ireland. She highlights the need to understand the past and the over 1,000 families seeking answers about their loved ones. Caroline Nokes welcomes the Bill for enabling further investigations and providing justice to families.

Fleur Anderson supports the carry-over motion, emphasising the need to address the pain and trauma of over 1,000 families seeking answers about their loved ones. She highlights the importance of the Bill in enabling further investigations and providing justice to families, as well as the need to protect veterans.

Robinson lamented the delay in introducing the Bill and the short time given for stakeholders to review the amendments. He welcomed the Government's acceptance of some amendments but expressed frustration over the terms of reference for the legacy commission, specifically the exclusion of the Omagh bombing. He urged the Government to extend the dates for the legacy commission to include this incident.

Hayes intervened to suggest that the Government amendments were tabled in good faith but that more time was needed to consider them properly. He agreed that it would be preposterous to have such a short time to consider the amendments.

Allister intervened to point out that the Dublin Government has refused to hold an inquiry into their role and knowledge of the Omagh bomb, reinforcing the need for the legacy commission to investigate the matter.

Cummins, acting as the Member in charge of the debate, reduced the time limit for speeches to three minutes to accommodate more speakers.

Carns thanked the Secretary of State for his engagement and welcomed the Government amendments. However, he expressed concern about the twin-track approach to truth, justice, and reconciliation, advocating for a single route through the legacy commission to streamline the process and reduce legal costs.

Supports the carry-over motion, paying tribute to victims and sharing stories of individuals affected by the Troubles. Highlights the case of Jennifer Gillespie and Mo Norton, whose families are seeking justice. Argues that the Bill should proceed to allow for justice for victims and veterans who have waited for decades.

Opposes the carry-over motion, questioning its necessity and the fundamental flaws in the Bill. Emphasises the importance of justice being seen to be done and the need for a legislative framework that reflects reality with clarity and proportionality. Argues that extension will not repair the flaws in the Bill.

Expresses lack of confidence in the Bill among veterans and emphasises the need for their views to be heard by elected representatives. Urges the Bill to gain the support of veterans before proceeding.

Davis argues that the Bill is morally bankrupt and prioritises diplomatic advantage over justice for British soldiers. He criticises the lack of scrutiny on the Irish Government's role in the troubles, including their provision of sanctuary for IRA terrorists and their role in the Omagh bombing. He urges the Government to drop the Bill and start again.

Eastwood supports the carry-over motion, acknowledging its imperfections but arguing that it is necessary to address the long-standing issue of justice for victims and their families. She expresses hope that those in the Gallery will understand that all individuals matter and that the Bill will help bring truth to those affected by the conflict in Northern Ireland.

Allister criticises the lack of co-operation from the Irish Government, citing their failure to answer questions related to the Omagh bombing. He emphasises the importance of cross-border dimensions and the need for answers from the Dublin Government regarding the role of IRA killers and their sanctuary and supply from the south of the border.