Social Development Minister John Spellar said:

“After decades of underperformance, Belfast is on the way back. These early years of the new millennium are Belfast’s decade for growth and renewal. It's time to utilise the value of the land in the North East and North West of the City Centre and make that value work for Belfast. The masterplans identify locations for two large department stores. Retail opportunities for local independent traders as well as international brands new to the City are also on the horizon. This type of shopping will position Belfast as a major regional retail destination. These proposals hold the potential to deliver at least 4,000 new jobs in addition to the 3,000 at Victoria Square. These jobs will provide career opportunities for our young people and the prospect of building a better life for those who live in deprived neighbourhoods.

“Victoria Square remains Government’s priority to spearhead retail-led regeneration and provides the bedrock for renewing the City Centre. The development of the North East and North West Quarters needs to complement Victoria Square by expanding the retail sector at a pace which maximises opportunity for investors and consumers.

“Both Quarters have their own unique history, challenges and potential for growth and renewal. That is why we have prepared distinct masterplans for the North East and North West. The future of both areas deserves specific detailed consideration.

“Looking ahead, we see a decade of renewal for the City Centre starting with Victoria Square and then accommodating two further schemes. There is an early decision to be made on the order in which further development proceeds. The period of public consultation on the masterplans getting underway today is therefore of great importance. We want your views on the draft masterplans. I look forward to receiving your comments.

“Last autumn, I announced that William Ewart Properties, principal landholders in the North East Quarter, would be given first opportunity to respond to the future development brief for that area.

“Castlecourt is of central and strategic importance to the regeneration of the North West Quarter and access to Castlecourt must be secured if we are to achieve the comprehensive redevelopment proposed in the masterplan. Westfield Shoppingtowns Ltd, owner of Castlecourt, has a proven track record in delivering large scale and complex development projects. I am therefore announcing, for public consultation, that Westfield should be given first opportunity to respond to the future development brief for the North West Quarter. In parallel with the consultation on the draft masterplan, I am seeking comments on this proposal before I take a final decision later this year."

UTV Internet reported:

Chairman Michael Mates, said some years ago Northern Ireland was the first part of the UK to develop a waste management strategy in response to EU directives setting out how it would deal with the issue of waste.

:: No clear estimate of how much funding would be required to deal with waste over the life of the strategy existed - and there was not clear funding plan for how new infrastructure would be delivered.

The IRA has owned up publicly. It has made some attempt to deliver on promised expulsions, conceding 'involvement', but leaving unresolved what the McCartneys want in terms of justice. Having killed their victim and seriously injured his friend, members of the organisation then destroyed the evidence of the crime. The IRA would have done nothing to rectify this without the courageous campaign of the family. The subsequent IRA investigation was secret, illegal, and carried the implied threat of further illegal sanctions and of possible violence.

However, he points out:

Some will welcome their move as better than nothing. But it does not meet the position of the McCartney's sisters, who have expressed confidence in the PSNI investigation. They want those with information to give it to the police. The people with information are the IRA. The IRA will not co-operate with the PSNI investigation.

With an echo of Lear, he hints that the organisation's reassurances can be read an ominnous intent to do nothing:

This puts in question the IRA's statement that "nothing" should impede the family's search for justice. It is also ominous about further possible violence in the references to the fact that "intimidation or threats will not be tolerated".

As well as the family's rejection of the version of events included in the IRA statement, there's also a brief account of the confrontation at the rally between an uncle of Robert McCartney and Sinn Féin's Alex Maskey -

Despite the IRA's court martial and expulsion of three members - allegedly including the former officer commanding the Belfast brigade - the family claim at least nine others implicated in the killing are being sheltered by the organisation.

They also claimed the IRA's version of the murder outside a Belfast pub - in which Mr McCartney and a friend were beaten, stabbed and left for dead - was wrong and that a whispering campaign against the family was being conducted.

The unprecedented protest in Sinn Féin's heartland has put the party under severe pressure with Alex Maskey, the former Sinn Féin mayor of Belfast, openly confronted on the street yesterday.

Asked whether, as residents claim, two of the men involved in the clean-up after the murder had previously acted as his election workers, he said he would not comment on "falsehoods in the media".

He also denied claims by residents that republicans had ordered children to riot in the Markets area to impede police investigating the murder.

As he was answering these questions, one of Robert McCartney's uncles burst through the crowd, shouting: "You have nine other members of this gang ... who butchered my nephew. When are you going to hand them over? You couldn't even remember Robert's name [after the murder]. Hand over the 12."

There are claims that those involved in the murder are still under IRA protection -

Despite the IRA's call on Friday night that no one should be intimidated into not giving evidence, one Short Strand source said the three expelled IRA men were still considered to be under their protection.

The source said the IRA members were at their homes and one was at an IRA safe house. One of the men involved in the murder had been expelled before, but was allowed back shortly afterwards, after undergoing a punishment shooting.

A senior local IRA member was seen at the rally and several IRA members not involved in the murder were seen walking around the area before the rally. One source said: "This was a subtle form of intimidation."

And, as reported in today's Irish News, the individual who was widely reported as giving a statement to the police was not one of those expelled by the IRA -

A man who was questioned by police and released this weekend was not one of the three expelled IRA men.

Some detail of SF's Head Office accounts, and official assets, are given -

Mr Mackin said the party owns numbers 44 and 58 Parnell Square, Dublin, and 51, Falls Road. Its accounts give a value of €1.88 million to these buildings. Number 58 Parnell Square was bought in 1984 for Ir£47,000.

"We've benefited from the boom," he said.

Number 51-55 Falls Road, Belfast, is owned by a company called Sevastapol Developments, on behalf of the party, which leases it.

Wages and salaries in 2003 were €550,190. Mr Mackin said everyone employed by head office gets the same salary, €500 a week gross. There were 22 positions during 2003 in Northern Ireland and the Republic.

Secretaries and assistants employed by elected representatives are not paid by the party but by the British and Irish exchequers.

Additionally local cumainn's accounts are not included in the head office accounts -

Local cumainn also raise finance and own or rent property, and their finances are not included in the head office accounts. Most properties owned have mortgages against them.

Mr Mackin produced a list showing 16 properties in the Republic and 31 in Northern Ireland, that are owned or leased by local party units. He said 5, Blessington Street, Dublin, was sold by the party a few years ago.

Ownership of 44 Parnell Square goes back to 1911, he said.

Recently the party had set up two companies, Republican Merchandising Ltd and Parnell Publications Ltd, which are concerned with, respectively, the party's Dublin shop and internet site, and its newspaper, An Phoblacht.

As the companies were only recently set up, no accounts have yet been filed. The setting up of the companies will mean the party will save on VAT payments.

Mr Mackin said operations such as the Felons Club in Belfast are heavily regulated and have nothing to do with Sinn Féin's finances. "Apart from merchandising, we have no other form of business whatsoever," he said.

The article finishes with some details of Mr Mackin's own business dealings -

Mr Mackin, a native of Belfast, was joint Sinn Féin national treasurer with the late Joe Cahill for 10 years up to about four years ago, when the party established the position of finance director.

He is a member of the ardcomhairle. Arrested in 1972, he served three years in prison in the North for membership of the IRA.

He said he was always interested in business and this was why he worked on the party's finances.

He said that "around about the time of the ceasefire" he became more involved in his personal business affairs and now owns businesses and property here and property in Portugal.

His first business venture was a pool hall in Dundalk, where he now lives. He secured loans from the bank to buy and develop the business, he said.

He made investments in property in Dublin "for tax reasons" in the period before property prices in the city began to rise steeply.

Working with an old friend based in Belfast, he established a cleaning company and a security services company. Both of these were involved in supplying services to the Sheridan IMX cinema complex on Parnell Street, Dublin and other companies in the area.

The Sheridan businesses collapsed a number of years ago though the operation of one, Century City, an amusement arcade, has since been taken on by Mr Mackin.

No doubt some wag will ask whether these figures include all recent transactions.. and, according to the Electoral Commission, with representation in either Westminster, the NI Assembly or the European Parliament, a political party is required to have an accounting year of 1 January to 31 December.

But the cynic in me has to note the fact that in a 2003 High Court judgement, in SF's failed appeal against the refusal of an Electoral Commission policy development grant, specific mention was made of the fact that "there was no suggestion that Sinn Fein was so lacking in financial resources that its failure to receive the grant would prevent it from imparting information or ideas, or from developing policies for electioneering".. hmmm.. Will that decision now face a renewed legal challenge?

The article deserves to be read in full, so I'll resist the temptation to excerpt isolated lines or paragraphs, but I have added emphasis -

Sinn Féin's credibility problem - John Waters

My daughter and her friend recently gleefully posed me a riddle: There are two towns, Liestown, where the inhabitants always lie, and Truthstown, where everyone tells the truth. A man from one of the towns says: "I am from Liestown" - do you believe him?

Sinn Féin's credibility problem is a bit like this. In republican theology, Sinn Féin members who also belong to the IRA are obliged to deny this connection because it involves a criminal offence. Sinn Féin denials of criminality, therefore, literally cannot be believed.

Similarly, persistent demands by Sinn Féin for "proof" of criminality, implying that no charge can be sustained against the republican movement other than on the basis of the accepted legal standard of "beyond reasonable doubt", are an unsustainable invocation of the logic of Truthstown.

Everyone knows the IRA exists, what it does and why, that it has leaders, and that there are strong ties and a high degree of cross-membership between Sinn Féin and the IRA. And everyone knows also that Sinn Féin, to the extent that it is separate from the IRA, not merely respects but venerates the military wing. To suggest that there is something preposterous in the observations being made about such connections is to treat the public as though it was unentitled to employ common sense.

Although continuing exchanges about republican criminality exhibit superficial similarities to a debate, the discussion is taking place in two distinct languages pertaining to irreconcilable perceptions of reality. Politicians such as Michael McDowell believe that, as defenders of the rule of law, they speak to the highest form of public morality.

But republicans, in their own minds, also inhabit the high moral ground. They believe that years of combating injustice under the banner of the Irish nation's struggle for integrity confer on them the right not merely to engage in what Michael McDowell insists on calling "criminality", and to deny such involvement in order to prevent him putting them in jail, but to refuse the idea that the term "criminality" is appropriate at all.

Thus, republicanism is protected by a series of semantic Chinese walls which the logic of the wider world is not just incapable of penetrating but actually doomed to strengthen with every attack. This siege mentality will ensure that recent events may prevent Sinn Féin making political progress while failing to dent its existing base.

There is a political background to this. The Belfast Agreement offered, in theory at least, the opportunity for all sides to stand down traditional positions and strategies, inviting each to concede something in the interests of a settlement. You could argue, as I did at the time, that unionists acted in bad faith by seeking retrospectively to turn the agreement into a republican surrender. But republicans also refused to stand down their core rationale, based on their sense of being beleaguered in a state run by their political enemies.

What was being offered to republicanism in the Belfast Agreement was not just power- sharing but co-ownership of a peaceful, democratic society. You might say that the true act of decommissioning required of republicans in return was not of bullets, bats and rackets, but of victimology, the standing down of the sense of grievance that had been their driving force.

The republican leaders ultimately lacked the confidence to accept that challenge, and instead encouraged their constituency to cling to a historic sense of victimhood. Their big mistake was believing that the duplicity of their opponents took all the pressure off them - that as long as unionists continued to behave as unionists always had, the republican culture of grievance-based subversion could continue. The IRA could go on, the rackets could go on, the "community policing" too - and, more than that, the nod and wink, the "aren't we the bould Fenian boyos" mentality, could continue.

Republicans have misunderstood the motives of many who supported their right to a voice, misreading a desire for peace as an endorsement of their overall demeanour and ethos. Many of those who worked for their inclusion do not think the Provisionals anywhere near as cute, clever, sexy, bould or even Fenian as they appear to think themselves. There is widespread repugnance of the Jesuitical contortions they have achieved to redraw lines between right and wrong, enabling a settled justification of actions incompatible with democracy.

And there is a growing perception that the corruption of idealism within the movement has vindicated the most apocalyptic prophecies of the Provisionals' most virulent opponents.

These are serious questions in the minds of people who bear Sinn Féin no particular antipathy. If, regardless, republicans wish to continue standing on their claims of victimhood and demands for judicial proof of every suspicion voiced about them, then we, the public, are entitled to draw conclusions. The alternative is for Sinn Féin to emerge from the ghetto and make a significant concession to the disquiet of the world outside itself.

© The Irish Times

[emphasis mine]

Moloney remembers that Adams manoeuvred the ranks of the IRA, who were unaware of his long-term aims, along the path of his peace strategy by allowing them to use the human bomb tactic which put the hawks in an impossible position.

" It would be difficult to devise a greater PR disaster yet it was approved by the Army Council, on which Adams and Martin McGuinness sat, at a time when both men were repeatedly warning the IRA against operations that endangered civilian life. The effect of the tactic was to whip up outrage throughout Ireland and to isolate and demoralise the IRA. It undermined the use of violence and strengthened those, like Adams and McGuinness, who were arguing for a political alternative such as the peace process. The episode was an important staging post on the way to the IRA ceasefire.
In a similar fashion the decision to rob the Northern Bank has left the IRA with only two options: to stay still or carry on down the road that Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness have mapped out for it. "

As Moloney points out Sinn Féin was unlikely to be seriously damaged by an attack on a bank. However, in combination with the McCartney murder, the effect has been far more serious than expected although the tactic might work yet. As Moloney points out the ball is now in the IRA’s court. Their call.

At the end of Victoria's reign, the novelist George Moore announced that the "sceptre of intelligence" was now being handed from London to Dublin; several notable figures returned to the Irish capital (including Moore himself), to take part in the various cultural experiments developing against a background of political radicalisation. One of the most celebrated was Yeats's Abbey Theatre, and the programmes from their first tours to London are displayed at the end of the NPG exhibition: symbolically austere and avant garde, they mark the distance travelled from the florid presentations of the Boucicault era. Max Beerbohm, providing a rave review, referred to the modern style and "exotic" charm of the Irish players. The Guildhall Show of Irish painters in 1904 similarly suggested that an indigenous, Ireland-based culture was now being exported from a country in the throes of cultural renaissance.

But many of those most influential in the process had learned their trade in London and (like Yeats, Shaw, Lavery and many others) continued to base their operations there. In this, they were following in the footsteps of a long-established tradition whereby Irish writers, painters, actors, politicians, lawyers and others played a notable part in the cultural and political history of the metropolis, often by using Irish contact-systems and presenting Irish material. These traditions can be traced down to our own day, too. Conquering, then as now, can be a two-way process.

In response, Paisley says: “That is a widely held view out there. I do my job. It if attracts adverse publicity, so be it. There’s no point in disputing these matters. I am not going to thump the table."

Those final paragrpahs indicate that he clearly believes that any talk of an IRA split is only talk. And, more importantly, he notes that it was the public pressure, in support of the McCartney family, that forced the IRA to take the (limited) action they have taken -

The IRA action [expelling three members] also settles another issue, that of growing speculation about a split between IRA hardliners and the Sinn Féin pragmatists on the Army Council. This is a decision that will benefit Sinn Féin, not least by removing any threat of electoral damage, but if there really was a split and the hardliners were in the ascendancy, as some observers have claimed, it never would have happened. Had they been in charge the IRA hardliners would have insisted on standing with their men and hunkering down for the storm. If anything the decision demonstrates that it is the Sinn Féin element of the IRA leadership which is calling the shots.[my emphasis]

Having said that the IRA and its political spokesmen had to be dragged, almost kicking and screaming to this decision and had it not been for the persistence and courage of Robert McCartney's sisters it is likely this would never have happened.

This carries an important message about the way this IRA and Sinn Féin leadership behaves and it has lessons for the wider problems caused to the peace process by the Northern Bank robbery. Without intense and unrelenting pressure that leadership will resist making any move at all in the hope that it if it sits long enough something will happen to improve fortunes. But if the pressure is applied strongly and resolutely enough that leadership will move. [emphasis mine]

As the Irish and British governments look forward to new peace talks and the hope that they can persuade the IRA to disband, decommission fully and abandon criminality it is a lesson they would be foolish to overlook.

O’Rawe suggests in his book , “Blanketmen, An Untold Story of the H-Block Hunger Strike”, which is published tomorrow that this was because “the IRA wanted to use continuing sympathy for the hunger strikers to win a by-election.”.

“The concessions offered to end the hunger strike were put to Gerry Adams, now the Sinn Fein leader, by a Foreign Office intermediary known as “the Mountain Climber”. His identity remains a mystery.
Thatcher’s government effectively conceded four of the IRA demands including the abolition of prison uniforms, more visits and letters, and segregation of prisoners on political lines. Prison work for IRA men was to have been widely defined to include educational courses and handicrafts. The only point the government refused to concede was free association of prisoners on the IRA wing. “

O’Rawe is blunt :

“Omission, rather than lies, was the order of the day. The leadership never told the hunger strikers’ relatives of Mountain Climber’s intervention and they washed their hands of any responsibility for making or breaking the deal,” he says.

The Hungerstrikes continued, 6 more men died, and were settled on less favourable terms.

O’Rawe is quoted :

“No matter which way one views it, the outside leadership alone, not the prison leadership, took the decision to play brinkmanship with McDonnell’s life. If Bik and I had had our way, Joe and the five comrades who followed him to the grave would be alive today.”

Bik being Brendan ‘Bik’ McFarlane , the IRA prison commander at the Maze, who, according to O’Rawe, felt the terms offered were acceptable.

The article finishes with:

" Adams declined to comment until he had read the book, but Danny Morrison, a former republican publicity officer, said O’Rawe’s claims were wrong. He questioned the authenticity of the deal offered by the government and claimed the IRA army council did not run the hunger strike. “The prisoners were sovereign, it was their call.” “

Extract from book.

"I say that mindful of all the difficulties that we have had trying to straighten out and get a proper judicial system and so on, but I think that this is such a serious situation."

The IRA said one of those expelled made a statement to a solicitor and called on the others to take responsibility. Two of the men dismissed were described by the IRA as "high ranking volunteers".

The expulsions came after what the IRA called "an investigation" into last month's killing.

As reported in the NY Times, he had initially embraced his well-deserved fame as a dancing fiend.. but not for long - talk show appearances have been cancelled and he, apparently, is now living as a virtual recluse.. the burden of that difficult second video clip torments him - How can he top what has gone before?

Let me just echo what John has already said on his blog, and add that the thought that I had contributed to this guy's misery did cross my mind, briefly. But he hadn't been duped, he hadn't had the clip stolen or posted without his knowledge. He made it, and posted it, himself. And it IS a GENIUS clip! That's why everyone.. well.. most of us.. well.. some of us.. linked to it.

Dude.. listen to what your friend, Corey Dzielinski, says in the NY Times article - "Gary this is your one chance to be famous - embrace it"

Richard Delevan has an appropriate quotation from an interview in the Irish Times that fingers a crucial problem for the party, its (apparently) sudden loss of the moral ground in its own heartland. It seems the McCartney murder has given wider coverage to others whose cases had been kept very local:

"When did we hand over our right to run our own community? When did we sell our birthright and allow others to deal with our problems? And why can't these others stop the thugs who roam our streets and terrorise us? Why can't they stop the joyriders, the drug dealers and the hoods? I think we all know the answer to that one. Shame on them."

However, his caveat raises interesting questions about who else might be in a position to help the family and others in the communities affected. Adams is very unspecific on this: "but if they are not comfortable with that then let them go forward to a reputable body to get the family get where they want to be".

No doubt everyone will have their own theories about which reputable bodies will be. Amongst them may be a number of NGOs with good records in supporting people affected by crime within a community context. But none of them can replace a police force, in its capacity to clearly and accountably form prosecutions and see them through to court.

If, as many will suspect, the IRA is one of the reputable bodies Adams has in mind, it may come to be seen to be compromised on a number of counts. Not least that several of its (albeit lately disowned) members are accused of using their authority to conceal their own supposed guilt or complicity in the crime. But more fundamentally (and some of its members may grudgingly accept this), it is not a police force.

Ironically, the PSNI is now one of the most accountable police forces in the developed world. This is largley a result of sustained pressure on the part of the SDLP and Sinn Fein, with the purpose of enhancing the confidence of Nationalists in a comprehensive police force.

Will the party see out the pressure and continue to withhold its recognition of the PSNI as some kind of quid pro quo for the final exit of the IRA from Irish politics? Or will it recognise a vastly reformed police service and give practical support to the McCartney's or indeed others who may have suspended their own quest for justice?

The problem with the former is that it's value may have already fallen into serious negative equity. The risk of the latter could be the fragmentation of the movement. But as the dramatic fall in Adams's own popularity ratings shows, continued inaction has serious costs of its own.

"Under such a law, the biggest potential loss for Sinn Fein would be its annual Party Leader's Allowance which came to €285,550 last year and which is intended to fund parliamentary research and policy. As the Provisionals' best-known Oireachtas research recently has been a spying operation targeting government ministers and TDs, a case could be made for withholding the Party Leader's Allowance".

"In 2004, Sinn Fein qualified for an additional windfall worth €310,730 in reimbursements from the Department of Finance following the local and European elections. While the party declared an expenditure of €313,939 and 81c in the European election campaign, it was repaid €38,092 for each of its four candidates. At the same time, its 25 candidates in the local elections received a combined reimbursement payment of nearly €160,000".

By contrast, the Progressive Democrats, home of Justice Minister and Sinn Fein bete noire Michael McDowell, did not receive a cent from the taxpayer for last year's Euro elections as it did not field a candidate. The year before, it qualified for €303,264 Exchequer funding, compared to Sinn Fein's €416,566.

Follow the link to vote yes or no www.irwinsbakery.com/stpatricksdayoff
and to validate the vote one ends up having to supply one's name and address to a bakery.

This is classified as "News".

I call it sexist exploitative advertising.

And although I'm not terribly religious I think our national Saint deserves better treatment than a naff article featuring a scantily clad woman in a paper providing back-door advertising for a 'celebrity chef' and a bakery .

Off Soapbox.

This is not an unexpected announcement, as it is understood to have also been recommended in the Chilcott report (which was never published), but it is a proposal that hasn't really been analysed.

The new leading role for MI5 is interesting in a number of respects.

Firstly, the timing. Policing and Justice was supposed to be devolved (in the context of IRA decommissioning) to the Assembly, with legislation to that effect to be introduced by this summer, according to the Comprehensive Agreement. Whether the Government is still aiming to work to the timetable of this practically defunct document is unclear, but a cross-community vote would have been required and the British Government said it "will work to promote the necessary confidence to allow such a vote to take place within two years".

Anyway, in 2007, it was expected - and if there is a political miracle, I suppose it still could happen - that Ministers in a Northern Ireland Executive in the Assembly would be in ultimate charge of the PSNI. As it is, a Direct Rule Minister will remain where the buck stops.

The PSNI currently has security primacy in Northern Ireland, while 'the Security Service' (what most of us know MI5 as) has had the lead responsibility throughout the rest of the UK since 1992. It is no big secret that there has been tremendous competition between different security agencies in the past, here and in GB.

That unhealthy rivalry has, during the Troubles, meant information was not shared properly. It could lead to botched operations, as detailed in, for example 'Phoenix: Policing the Shadows', when an Army patrol might stumble blindly into a police security operation, causing it to be abandoned. In the worst circumstances, this lack of communication led to agents who were being run by one arm of the State killing agents in another, as suggested by Martin Ingram in 'Stakeknife'.

The Police Ombudsman is currently investigating a number of controversial killings . However, she can only investigate complaints against the PSNI, not the military, although their work often intertwines.

For example, the PSNI hasn't fired a plastic bullet since 2002, and that has been influenced by the fact that the Ombudsman must investigate all such incidents when they happen, and there is much greater control over how the police use them. However, the Army can also use plastic bullets, and while there are mechanisms to hold it to account, they are unlikely to result in any action.

While it could be argued that the Army has fired plastic bullets in justifiable circumstances in recent years, we know from experience that it is not held to account by the Courts or the Independent Assessor for Complaints Against the Military for misdeeds in Northern Ireland. Any punishment during the Troubles has been token.

To extrapolate the plastic bullets situation to intelligence gathering - part of which includes agent handling and running informers - in national security matters (as opposed to 'ordinary' criminal matters) raises further concerns about accountability. If these practices become the exclusive preserve of MI5, the Ombudsman will, from 2007, not be able to investigate complaints about informers and agents, because they will be under the control of the military Security Service.

Given the past activities of some agents or informers - and that's not to deny that many have saved lives in very difficult and dangerous circumstances - that amounts to a real democratic deficit.

Security Minister Ian Pearson has said: “I am not persuaded therefore that looking at complaints made against members of the armed forces would be appropriate [for the Ombudsman]. There are separate arrangements through the MoD for a completely different complaints procedure.

“I am sure I could contemplate cases where complaints might be made that relate to both the Army and to the police jointly. In those circumstances, the Police Ombudsman would investigate the complaint against the police or officers and it would be for the Army complaints procedure to deal with the complaints against Army personnel.”

While the Government has “encouraged” “good working protocols” between the two, it is hardly the best way to operate where there are joint cases, particularly as the remits of the Ombudsman and the Independent Assessor of Military Complaints differ so much. The latter has far fewer powers, and it is difficult to see how the Government will attempt to resolve potentially differing interpretations of the circumstances of a case where the Ombudsman says one thing and the Army complaints assessor another.

In addition, the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) has noted that police investigations of alleged criminal behaviour by members of the armed forces could not be supervised by the Independent Commission for Police Complaints for Northern Ireland (ICPC) or the Independent Assessor of Military Complaints Procedures.

The Human Rights Commission has already pointed out the accountability problem:

“[W]e are distinctly unhappy that the remit of the Police Ombudsman does not extend to investigating allegations of improper conduct raised against members of the British Army in Northern Ireland, even when at the time the soldiers in question were operating in aid of the civil power.

“In this regard there is a serious gap in the current accountability arrangements, since the Independent Assessor of Military Complaints Procedures (currently Mr Jim McDonald), who holds office under section 98 of the Terrorism Act 2000, has no power to himself conduct investigations into alleged misconduct by soldiers. The army would be investigating itself in these instances, or the police would doing so even though the police were directing the army in the situation in question.

“In these three areas we would like to see the remit of the office of the Police Ombudsman extended. We hope very much that the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee will make recommendations to that effect when it issues its report.”

The Northern Ireland Affairs Committee, chaired by former NIO minister Michael Mates MP, saw some merit in this argument in its recent report on the Police Ombudsman, and it will be interesting to see if the Government pays attention to this recommendation:

“While it is not presently clear that the extensions to the Ombudsman ’s remit sought by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission are justified, we do believe that these proposals have illuminated potential weaknesses in the present complaints arrangements which have been identified by the Ombudsman herself. We think that these deserve further, thorough consideration by the government.”

The SDLP said it was the only party that met Sir John Chilcott to oppose his alleged recommendation about the transfer of lead responsibility on national security matters. Mark Durkan said:

"The SDLP gave Mr Chilcott a very clear message. We are totally opposed to any move to take intelligence policing from the PSNI and give it to MI5 or British Army intelligence. That would put intelligence policing beyond the accountability of the Policing Board and the Police Ombudsman, Nuala O'Loan - just as they are breaking through and completely reworking how intelligence policing is carried out in our society.

"Sinn Fein's simplistic slogan on disbanding Special Branch is dangerous. The securocrats are alarmed by the success of the Policing Board and the Police Ombudsman in reworking intelligence policing. They could use Sinn Fein's slogan as a guise to hand it over to MI5. That would undermine Patten. Worse, it would give intelligence policing over to those most involved in collusion. The SDLP will not tolerate it. We will fight any such proposal tooth and nail. The police service must have the range of responsibilities set out in Patten, including intelligence policing."

The SDLP did not make a submission to the NI Affairs Committee (the UUP and Sinn Fein did), despite this rhetoric. The SDLP also have a strange interpretation of the Patten report, which was explicit about where responsibility should lie. However, the party has raised legitimate points.

Given its interest in these matters, it seems odd to say the least that Sinn Fein did not once refer to any of this in its submission to the NI Affairs Committee, which should keep conspiracy theorists happy.

It is now clear though, that when Sinn Fein eventually signs up to policing (which is expected to coincide with the IRA ending all paramilitary activity, or at least putting clear blue water between itself and SF), that it will not have access to the sensitive PSNI intelligence. That will have been shifted to MI5. Is SF's hatred of Special Branch so great that it is prepared to forego such potential goodies? It just seems so unlike SF...

The SDLP has numerous direct references to this subject on its website. Despite lots of press releases about collusion with loyalists involving MI5, the Sinn Fein website refers to the transfer of lead responsibility of intelligence gathering to MI5 just once - on Thursday.

In his own analysis in the Indo, Alan Murray writes: "Amazingly, Gerry Adams welcomes this potential change which probably leaves the British mandarins at Stormont chortling with laughter.

"Because the implication that accompanies MI5 intelligence supremacy in the North, is the reality that if and when Sinn Fein joins the Policing Board, the Chief Constable of the day will be able to respond to penetrating questions from republican representatives with the perfectly legitimate and honest response "Sorry Gerry, that is an intelligence matter, I don't know and it's not my responsibility.""

The Sinn Fein statement was remarkably muted, in comparison to its response to other British announcements. Gerry Kelly said:

"Today's announcement is a pre-emptive strike by the British establishment ahead of the transfer of powers. It is designed to prejudice the transfer of powers in favour of British state interests by designating matters due to be transferred, as excepted matters. Sinn Fein made it clear to both governments that this is unacceptable."

Perhaps there are other reasons for SF's relative silence on the issue, based on the very different cultures within Special Branch and MI5. Five is deeply analytical, highly bureaucratic, hoards information, and has been criticised for being slow to act, poring over intelligence assessments instead of taking necessary action. Special Branch here has been seen as emotionally attached to the notion of beating the IRA, 'taking the battle' to republicans in some senses. MI5 also shifts its desk officers around every couple of years, whereas a Special Branch officer would have built up years of experience in Northern Ireland.

Perhaps it is MI5’s lack of emotional attachment to taking on Irish terrorism, and occasional inaction and incompetence that defines Sinn Féin’s relaxed attitude to future changes in counter-terrorism.

MI5 whistleblower David Shayler seemed frustrated by the emphasis on analysis, and questioned why MI5 was not more pro-active when taking on the IRA.

“It was farcicial. There I was with a fast-moving target – the IRA were planting bombs down the street and our Security Service remained obsess with pedantic drafting and redrafting of documents.

“I questioned whether time would be better spent investigating these IRA terrorist targets… I could see no point in spending days poring over the wording of routine documents,” he said, in a possible reference to the warrants for telephone taps.

Murray raised other pertinent questions in his article: "For instance will the Garda be allowed to communicate and liaise with British spooks? Will Bertie Ahern or his successor from 2007 be able to get answers from the Secretary of State in the North after MI5 takes over and closes down the limited information access through the Policing Board that currently exists?"

The PSNI Chief Constable has also been remarkably relaxed about his responsibilities handed to another agency. He told the Blanket last year that transfer of national security powers was a "matter for government, it is as simple as that, it is not a matter for policing."

"I am not sure you devolve responsibility for something that is a national issue," Hugh Orde added, perhaps unsurprisingly for a Met cop who investigated allegations of collusion between the security agencies here and loyalist paramilitaries, and who is probably comfortable with the model employed in London.

Security journalist Alan Murray has also pointed out that there has been a drastic reduction in the sheer numbers of informers used in Northern Ireland. He estimates 300 have gone, and more officers left Special Branch after Patten than any other part of the police service.

The SDLP disagrees with the Chief Constable’s position and has called for "[t]he devolution of justice powers, with unionists and nationalists underwriting each other’s security. Regional security should be left in the hand of the politicians of the region. That is fundamental to solving the divisions in our society".

Also in the SDLP's response to the Chilcott report, it stated:

"During those meetings [with Chilcott] it became clear to us that Sir John, as part of his remit to consider wider lessons, was examining the relationship between the police and MI5 in intelligence gathering. One of the reasons for this was the need to prepare for the devolution of justice and policing powers. Others have also informed us of a great anxiety within the British system at the prospect of devolved ministers having responsibility for policing.

"The British Government appears to have received the report from Sir John in July 2003. However, no details of it have been published, despite SDLP requests that this be done. Indeed, the Secretary of State has refused to provide us with any information on it whatsoever.

"Newspaper reports have, however, alleged that Sir John recommends giving MI5 oversight of all intelligence gathered in the North, including all Special Branch informants, and that MI5 is to recruit handlers to this end. These changes, it is reported, would erode Special Branch’s current role."

Chilcott, a former Permanent Secretary at the Northern Ireland Office, was originally asked to report on the Castlereagh holding centre break-in, where even some outspoken unionist politicians seemed to restrain themselves from blaming the IRA.

If Chilcott did indeed recommend that MI5 take on national security, it merely reinforces the theories of those who suspected that the purpose of the robbery was not to acquire information on informers, but to discredit Special Branch in order to make the transition of responsibilities to MI5 that much easier.

Another theory that implicates British intelligence is that the break-in was to protect the agent Stakeknife, while another accuses rogue or retired Special Branch officers of involvement in a bid to undermine the Agreement.

The Daily Telegraph said Chilcott concluded that "at least one serving officer and one retired officer offered the IRA the opportunity to get the information. Their motivation is believed to have been an attempt to undermine the political process because they knew the Provisionals would be found with the documents and blamed for their theft". I have no idea if this is true.

It is probably only coincidence that Larry ‘the Chef’ Zaitschek expressed fears of his imminent extradition in January.

Special Branch chief Bill Lowry's swift and angry exit from the scene after 'Stormontgate' also indicates further major differences in attitude towards the Republican Movement between Special Branch and the Government. (The Police Ombudsman investigated a complaint by Lowry that he had been forced out by MI5, but she rejected his claim.)

Perhaps it is possible to draw some parallels between what has been happening behind the scenes in Northern Ireland recently, and what occurred when MI5 took the lead in the fight against the IRA in Great Britain in 1992, where there was undisguised hostility between the Security Service and the Metropolitan Police Special Branch (MPSB).

Each agency argued that the other was ineffective. For example, in its submission to the Cabinet for retaining primacy, the MPSB falsely blamed MI5 for the death of WPC Yvonne Fletcher in 1984, which infuriated MI5. This, and MPSB leaks to the press about MI5 ineffectiveness, was said to have turned the Home Office against the Met’s Special Branch.

Although the MPSB had had reasonable success in GB against IRA operations in the late 1980s, the mortar attack on 10 Downing Street encouraged MI5 - seeking a strong post-Cold War role - to lobby for primacy.

The Soho bomb in April 1992, in which the IRA bomber had been under MPSB surveillance, and the explosion in the City of London just days after the general election, appear to have been the final nails in the MPSB's coffin. Home Secretary Ken Clarke moved swiftly, and announced the change in responsibility for counter-terrorism on May 8.

It is entirely possible that events surrounding Omagh, Castlereagh and Stormontgate have been used as evidence of ineffectiveness by different agencies here, as leaks to the press always have.

It is difficult to understand why such a recommendation on national security would have been placed within Chilcott's remit to report on, and as the report was never published, his official conclusion that there was no evidence of government agency involvement in the break-in carries little real weight. Certainly the tactics at Castlereagh bore some similarity to those used by the covert methods of entry team that destroyed Steven Inquiry files on British agent Brian Nelson in Carrickfergus.

If the Government is telling us that it is transferring responsibilities to MI5 in Northern Ireland because it was recommended by the Patten report, then it should also pay attention to the NI Affairs Committee recommendation above and to another of Patten's proposals (6.44) - that a senior judicial figure based in Northern Ireland should be appointed to independently monitor surveillance activities, the use of informants, undercover operations and the interception of communications.

Until it does, no-one will be watching the watchers.

Barry McCaffrey reported in the Irish News yesterday:

A bitter war of words erupted last night with Sinn Fein accusing the Ulster Unionists of attempting to criminalise its voters.

“The attempt to criminalise republicans is nothing new.”

The mortgage lender says it has currently 654 million euros in capital employed and is expanding on the island.

It will open a regional headquarters in Belfast with the logic behind this move is that Northern Ireland is beginning to show signs of strong growth.

Marah says that it is partly the peace dividend, and partly the fact that economic expansion in the Republic is beginning to make an impact north of the border.

"If you look at employment growth in the course of 2004, it was below the Republic, which was 2.3%," he says.

"They had a 1.8% growth in Northern Ireland, in comparison with a European average of 0.5% and a British growth rate of 1.0%.

"You're looking at a growth rate that's 80% above that of the UK and almost four times the European average."

He also points out that there has been a shift in the nature of employment in the North, with job numbers in traditional industries falling by 6% and those in services and construction increasing by 8%.

"It's very similar to what happened here in the recent past," he says.

Speaking at the launch, Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams said:

"In 1992 Sinn Féin published a document 'Towards a Lasting Peace in Ireland' which set out our party's peace strategy. That document signposted the development and evolution of the peace process.

"This campaign will form the centerpiece of this the centenary year of Sinn Féin. We will be seeking support in every county in Ireland and among the Irish Diaspora. We will be engaging with political parties, the social partners, local communities, the churches, young people. We will be working to ensure that Irish unity is a reality in our lifetime."

On the Northern Bank robbery, Former Presbyterian Moderator the Rev Dr Alastair Dunlop said: "This wilful and planned act violated the law of God, subjected bank employees and their families to terror and cruelty, betrayed relationships with the two governments, other political parties and people of goodwill, and destroyed trust in the commitment of Sinn Fein to seek peace."

AS reported in the Examiner by Michael O’Farrell,

A FORMER director of the Bank of Scotland (Ireland) has confirmed he travelled to Bulgaria last month with Government troubleshooter Phil Flynn and Cork money lender Ted Cunningham.

However, Denis O’Connell, who is also a former ICC official, said he was “100% innocent and had nothing to hide in this matter”.

THe Examiner quotes from a statement by Mr O'Connell -

Mr O’Connell also said he had been asked by Phil Flynn to “carry out preliminary checks on Chesterton Finance as part of his assessment to become involved with the company”.

Mr O’Connell added that he was subsequently asked by Mr Flynn to travel to Bulgaria as one of a group of seven “for the purpose of investigating potential property opportunities”.

He added: “The reason I was asked to go to Bulgaria is because I have travelled on many occasions to Eastern Europe - particularly Croatia - where I have an interest in property.”

One point to note here. When Phil Flynn resigned from the Bank of Scotland(Ireland) board he described the decision to join Chesterton Finance as "a mistake" after initially saying that the company was "clean".

Again according to the statement quoted in the Examiner -

Mr O’Connell said that while in Bulgaria the group had met “auctioneers, property developers and builders, all in relation to property in Bulgaria”.

But he also distanced himself from Chesterton Finance and Ted Cunningham -

He said: “I attended some of these meetings - all of which were connected with the Bulgarian property market. Apart from the above, I have no other involvement with Chesterton Finance or Ted Cunningham.”

Although, I'd quite like to hear the results of his 'preliminary checks' into Chesterton Finance on behalf of Mr Flynn.

The Examiner recaps its earlier reports -

Earlier this week, the Irish Examiner confirmed Mr Flynn and Mr Cunningham opened two bank accounts and registered three new companies during the trip.

Mr Flynn and Mr Cunningham also met with a senior banker and finance minister Ilia Lingorski, who is responsible for foreign inward investment.

However, since he resigned from all his public positions and as chairman of the Bank of Scotland (Ireland) last week, Mr Flynn has repeatedly denied any involvement in IRA money laundering.

When speaking to the Irish Examiner on Monday, he promised to make all the details of his business links to Bulgaria public when the Criminal Assets Bureau returns the files it confiscated last week.

UTV reported:

The poll asked a cross-section of the Irish public a number of questions, among them:

While support for Sinn Féin has not dropped appreciably, falling only one percentage point to 9%, Gerry Adams personal approval rating now ranks him as the least popular leader of any party sitting in the Dáil, having plummeted from 52% in October of 2002 to just 31% for February of this year.

I don't buy into the idea that, although symbolic, simply joining the Policing Board is by itself sufficient "evidence that the IRA has stood down" -

Sinn Féin's endorsement of the PSNI and their appearance on the Policing Board with government approval will provide the crucial evidence that the IRA has stood down.

Why? It would be preposterous for the IRA to continue its activities if senior republicans were on a Policing Board charged with stopping IRA activities.

Clearly that could not happen.

That argument relies on the same logic which predicted that an end to IRA activity would follow inexorably from the signing of the 1998 Agreement. It was flawed logic then.. and it is flawed logic now.

But the part of Brian Feeney's article that stood out, for me, was this -

Whether or not that was the explanation behind the IRA's actions, the opportunity of months absent of political developments cuts both ways. The Irish government has clearly decided to take full advantage of the vacant period to force an end to the phase of the peace process which should have been completed five years ago, namely decommissioning and the removal of the IRA from the equation. As Bertie Ahern told the Dail, three major efforts in 2002, 2003 and December 2004 had failed.

Now he's telling the republican movement to act unilaterally. The message from Dublin is that they have no bargaining counters left. Far from the IRA being an advantage, it's a millstone round the neck of republicans.

No-one, and certainly not the DUP, will join them at a negotiating table while the IRA remains in business, or should that be in finance?

It's hard, maybe impossible, for republicans to see this but what Bertie Ahern and his ministers are doing queuing up to take a poke at Sinn Féin leaders, is trying to make it easier for Adams and McGuinness to convince their movement that the IRA must retire from the field and become an old comrades association.[emphasis mine]

As he points out, the Taioseach has been cautiously encouraging through the current crisis -

Throughout all this drama the taoiseach has tried to keep republicans' eyes on his target. While openly repeating his allegations that the Sinn Féin leaders he was negotiating with knew of IRA plans, he has taken every chance to repeat that he wants a comprehensive agreement that includes Sinn Féin. In other words, last December's deal is still available but only republicans can make it happen.

In the meantime, to concentrate their minds, the gardai and Criminal Assets Bureau will set about dismantling the IRA's financial structures built up since the late 1970s and laying bare the linkages within republicanism.

One embarrassing revelation will follow another in the coming months.

However, the implication seems to be that if the 'millstone' is shed, then that 'strategy' may be adapted. But, surely, the process of tackling organised crime of this nature should continue whether that 'millstone' is shed by Sinn Féin or not?

heh heh..

'We need inventive ways of using the Irish banking sector' By Newton Emerson

In lieu of his usual column Newton Emerson this week offers the following excerpts from current Sinn Féin policy documents without further comment [Do I still have to pay him - Ed?]:

It has been clearly shown that the private and public banking companies have at times been active participants in systematic tax fraud.

- from the 2002 Sinn Féin pre-budget submission

When it comes to formulating tax policy there has been one question that successive governments have been afraid to ask. Who is paying tax and more importantly who isn't?

- from the 2003 Sinn Féin pre-budget submission

We need more inventive and positive ways of using the massive financial resources of the Irish banking sector.

- from the 2004 Sinn Féin pre-budget submission

It is essential to reform and re-weigh the taxation system in favour of the low paid and to increase the overall tax take by targeting wealth, speculative property and corporate profits. Measures should include:

End tax avoidance schemes.

Measured increase in Corporation Tax and increased Capital Gains Tax for owners of multiple residential properties.

Create a 50 per cent tax band for incomes in excess of €100,000.

- from the 2005 Sinn Féin pre-budget submission

Creating new businesses and helping existing ones grow does not happen in a vacuum. It comes about in the context of the supply of skilled workers with access to transport.

- from the 2002 Sinn Féin general election manifesto

Communities have often formed their own new co-operatives, local currency networks, social enterprise and development projects.

- from the 2001 Sinn Féin policy review Breaking the Cycle

There is widespread recognition throughout Irish society of the need to invest in the new communications technologies.

- from the 2001 Sinn Féin Westminster election manifesto

Private property has been and remains an instrument of oppression of people the world over.

- from the 2003 Sinn Féin submission to the Oireachtas Committee on the Constitution

Sinn Féin proposes a tax on international financial speculation, with revenue to be used to promote development in the poorer regions of the world.

- from the 2002 Sinn Féin pre-budget submission

Sinn Féin believes that community economic regeneration and the partnership concept can act as catalysts for genuine socio-economic change if they are premised upon an ethos of inclusion and the principle of sustainable development at a local level.

- from the 1998 Sinn Féin policy overview Putting People First

Incineration and all attempts to impose incineration on communities against their will to be opposed.

- from the 2004 Sinn Féin local government manifesto

Poverty is a by-product of domination of the needs of profit over the needs of people.

- from the 2004 Sinn Féin discussion paper Eliminating Poverty

Society will pay greater costs in the future for the "free money" the politicians seek today.

- from the 2003 Sinn Féin policy document on private finance initiatives

We have a taxation system riven with systematic inequality, where vested interests are pampered and protected.

- from the 2002 Sinn Féin election document Building a Just Economy

It is to the continuing shame of recent governments that a large section of our high-income individuals have been able to pay tax at rates which are effectively below those of even the (lower) standard rate.

- from the 2002 Sinn Féin general election manifesto

Tax "loopholes" are indicative of the dominant culture of tax avoidance in which wealthy individuals and companies have grown accustomed to paying less than their fair share.

- from the 2002 Sinn Féin general election manifesto

Sinn Féin proposes to address both legal avoidance and illegal tax evasion as a high priority, confident in the knowledge that closing these gaps and effectively policing tax compliance will result in a dramatic increase in receipts taken.

- from the 2002 Sinn Féin general election manifesto

A rural investment bank needs to be set up that offers low-interest loans.

- from the 1998 Sinn Féin policy overview Putting People First

Everyone should have a meaningful role to play in developing the economy, particularly at a local level.

- from the 1997 Sinn Féin submission to the multi-party talks

The EU Council still meets and takes decisions in secret, without transparency or accountability

- from the 2004 Sinn Féin European election manifesto

Our view is that those who run the media should run it in public, and not behind closed doors.

- from the 2002 Sinn Féin general election manifesto

Government shall be accountable to the people and be based on openness, transparency and effective freedom of information legislation.

- from the 2004 Sinn Féin discussion document Rights for All

Newton Emerson is editor of the satirical website portadownnews.com

© The Irish Times
[just in case]

" At some point in this process, however, this effort demanded a fundamental act of reciprocity from republicanism - an irreversible embrace of peaceful means at the expense of violence and criminality. The moment for that conclusive act seems at last to have been reached. It is make your mind up time for the IRA, Sinn Féin and their supporters. And high time too.

Thus far, the response of Sinn Féin into this challenge has been inadequate. The vow to banish criminality from the republican movement is naturally encouraging, as far as it goes. But it is actions that count, not words. This is especially the case when the twisted theology of parts of republicanism, in which the possibility of a self-proclaimed political movement such as Sinn Féin or the IRA committing any act of criminality is still a contradiction in terms. This is a culture in which, all too often, to stab someone to death in a bar, as happened to Mr McCartney, to threaten witnesses not to talk to the police, or to rob a bank of millions of pounds do not qualify as criminal acts. Gerry Adams may talk of an end to criminality. But when he does so against the backdrop of a uniformed honour guard at an IRA commemoration it is meaningless to the outside world. It suggests that a new generation of republican leaders may be needed to take the great leap into lawful and democratic activity."

Press Association reports:

In a lengthy letter to Northern Ireland Secretary Paul Murphy, Chief Commissioner Professor Brice Dickson castigated the British Government for failing to give his commission proper powers, running down its numbers and ignoring or rejecting its recommendations.

Prof Dickson retired at the end of this month after heading the Commission during its first six years, a time when he has often clashed with the British Government.

Feeney writes:

The Irish government has clearly decided to take full advantage of the vacant period to force an end to the phase of the peace process which should have been completed five years ago, namely decommissioning and the removal of the IRA from the equation. As Bertie Ahern told the Dail, three major efforts in 2002, 2003 and December 2004 had failed.

No-one, and certainly not the DUP, will join them at a negotiating table while the IRA remains in business, or should that be in finance?

Feeney also - and rightly in my opinion - identifies the point at which the IRA will 'go away' as an active paramilitary organisation; when Sinn Fein eventually sign up to the Policing Board, which I believe is ultimately inevitable, if not likely in the short term.

Indeed, if the DUP had the wit to see it, Sinn Fein’s endorsement of the PSNI and their appearance on the Policing Board with government approval will provide the crucial evidence that the IRA has stood down.

Why? It would be preposterous for the IRA to continue its activities if senior republicans were on a Policing Board charged with stopping IRA activities.

The message from Dublin is clear; the ball is in Republican Movement's court. It has to deal with criminality, and until then, there will be a window of opportunity for the Irish (and to a lesser extent, the British) authorities to take on the RM financially.

If Sinn Fein and the IRA do not face the challenge, then it is likely that the continuing drip-drip effect of negative publicity surrounding republican criminality will be the result, which could affect Sinn Fein electorally at a time when the party is anxious to expand quickly.