It was staring us in the face all along. Responses to Andy Pollak
It was staring us in the face all along. A cross community approach to getting at the truth and thereby perhaps, one day, community reconciliation. Once you think about it, how could else could the ideal of community reconciliation happen otherwise?
The key proposal in Andy Pollak's latest essay is one that this distant observer hadn't realised is being taken forward by the Truth Recovery Process
Pressure for truth recovery persists largely tribally; reconciliation is beyond the horizon. Rival charges of coverup and 'lawfare" dominate.
The scale of distrust impels resorting to ever more legal process. We do not trust each other but we sort of trust the law - even though we believe it will fail to nail down hard results.This is surely the counsel of desperation. The continuing resort to law, endorsed by the courts in the present legal vacuum is the polar opposite of the UK government's intentions for a reformed Legacy Act.
Yet public pressure in cases like Kingsmills and Sean Brown pose insistent questions which demand serious attempts to answer them.
The Truth Recovery Process accepts the general wisdom that in most cases the law won't provide definitive answers. They have hit on the idea that the best available answers are more likely to emerge through intimate dialogue between victims and perpetrators. Conditional amnesty would be a catalyst. It would mean some recasting of the truth Recovery process in a form still.compatible with the brief of the Legacy Commission (ICRIR).
With reconciliation figuring more prominently, expensive combative lawyers would be replaced by natural reconcilers, Wave types, counsellors skilled in individual encounters.
There are snags of course. Omerta on all sides and corrosive distrust underlie everything.
Northern Ireland not South Africa
Confrontation between victims and perpetrators was an essential feature of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa, where the need to form stable majority government was imperative. That compulsion doesn't apply here. Our divisions are institutionalised in power sharing and the constitutional future is an open question. Personal reconciliation, or at least a composed acceptance emerging from close encounters between victim and perpetrator has been achieved and inspires but examples are few. We would certainly benefit from an up to date analysis of such encounters so far.
I find the argument that community reconciliation must come before constitutional change unconvincing. The two are on different dynamics.
Politics lurks in the background. Can the political parties be persuaded to support cross community dialogue of this kind?
Victims groups who call the shots would presumably be more amrnable provided other procedures were available. Not everyone relishes the prospect of face to face.
What are the incentives for such a development? Its all too easy to be sceptical. Frankly I can't judge.
Formidable obstacles are in the way, including the amour propre of both governments and the corrosive distrust that underlies so much. But I look forward very much to the unfolding debate.
Brian Walker
A terrific article by Andy Pollak that lays bare the highly politicised and partisan nature of calls for investigations into past atrocities.
So often, on all sides, it seems to amount to communal conflict by other means, pushing prospects for reconciliation farther into the background.
Liam Kennedy
SF suffers its lowest Assembly poll rating in years
Suzanne Breen, Political Editor, Belfast Telegraph, May 26th, 2025
VOTERS APPEAR TO FEEL DISILLUSIONED WITH STORMONT ADMINISTRATION
Sinn Fein has suffered a drop in support as the party falls to its lowest score in a LucidTalk Assembly poll in three years.
On 26%, it's down two points from February, although it still enjoys a comfortable eight-point lead over the DUP which is also shedding support as the TUV continues to rise.
Gavin Robinson's party is down one point to 18%, and Alliance has also fallen one point to 13%.
UUP, Greens and Aontú only parties to increase support - by one per cent each
With voters appearing to grow increasingly disillusioned with the Stormont administration's performance, the UUP is the only Executive party not to lose support — it's up one point to 12%.
The TUV is also up one point to 12%, while the SDLP is unchanged on 11%. It's good news for smaller parties which are not represented in the Assembly.
The Greens are up one point to 3%, while Aontu has also risen one to 2%. People Before Profit is unchanged on 1% as are others and independents on 2%.
Some 2,755 people took part in our online poll from 16-19 May. The sample was scientifically weighted to reflect the Northern Ireland population.
Sinn Fein was last on 26% in an Assembly poll in April 2022, just before last Assembly elections, when the DUP was on 20%. However, the republican party was on the rise at the time, up 1% from that January, and would go on to be the largest party in Stormont.
We asked voters to select four issues which matter most to them. The health service emerged as the most important issue to voters (71%) followed by the cost of living (49%), the economy/jobs (43%) and education (32%).
Northern Ireland remaining part of the UK was more important to unionists (46%) than Irish unity to nationalists (32%).
Just over one in five nationalists (22%) listed a border poll as one of the four most significant issues to them. Overall, it was judged the eighth most significant issue by Sinn Fein and SDLP voters.
Opposing the NI Protocol/Windsor Framework was ranked as important by almost a third of unionists (31%).
Health service concerns
While the health service was ranked as a major issue across the sectarian divide, it mattered most to Alliance/Green votes (88%) followed by nationalists (71%) and unionists (64%).
The cost of living mattered more to nationalists (55%) than to unionists (45%) and Alliance/Green voters (41%).
The economy/jobs were ranked as more important by unionists (49%) than Alliance/Green voters (40%) and nationalists (37%).
Those who support Naomi Long's party or the Greens viewed education as an important issue (43%) more than nationalists (32%) or unionists (26%) did.
Immigration was the fifth most important issue to voters (25%) but its significance varied hugely across the sectarian divide. Almost four in 10 unionists (39%) ranked it as a major issue compared to 18% of Alliance/Green voters and just one in 10 nationalists.
Younger voters view immigration as being as big an issue as education (25%).
Maintaining the Union is ranked as important by 15% of 18-34s but more — one in five — say Irish unity is a major issue for them. Among the over-55s, almost a quarter view NI remaining in the UK as a key issue with just under one in 10 saying the same of Irish unity.
O'Neill must deliver on her promises while TUV rise threatens flailing DUP
Suzanne Breen, Analysis, Belfast Telegraph, May 26th, 2025
Sinn Fein voters are more committed than those of its rivals, but disillusionment can creep in even with a loyal base.
There is no need for the party to panic at the results of LucidTalk's latest Assembly poll which shows its support falling to a three-year low.
It's on a very healthy 26%, comfortably ahead of the DUP and enjoying more than twice the popularity of its nearest nationalist competitor.
Yet this is the third successive survey in which Sinn Fein support has dropped. In five of our six polls from November 2022 to February 2024 when it entered the Executive, it was on 31-32%.
The party is super-resilient, it has a first-class election machine, and it is more than capable of regaining the ground it has lost.
Yet Sinn Fein would be foolish to ignore the drift away from it. The mood now is very different from when Michelle O'Neill became the first nationalist First Minister 16 months ago.
That moment generated pride and optimism across nationalism — even among SDLP voters — that politics would progress in a more positive direction now that the DUP was no longer Stormont's top dog.
Growing diappointment
Today, there is growing disappointment at what has been achieved. The change that so many nationalists hoped for hasn't materialised.
The DUP has (briefly) held a hurl, céilí danced, and spoken a cúpla focal, but then reverted to type. In essence, it's still its old obstructionist self in nationalist eyes.
O'Neill has stretched herself and republicans in her efforts to be a First Minister for all.
They have taken her to a Remembrance Sunday ceremony at City Hall; a private dinner with King Charles at Windsor Castle for the “leaders of the four nations”; and a VE Day commemoration.
While elements of the republican base may be uncomfortable with some of that engagement, there has been no kickback.
Rather, it is Sinn Fein's non-confrontational strategy regarding the DUP which is proving more problematic.
Nationalist grassroots fear that an overly passive approach emboldens the DUP. They want to see a toughening up.
The DUP may deny it, but the party centrally has decided on a strategy of running down the clock on Casement Park.
O'Neill promised last year that Casement would be built on her watch, and that all Executive parties were united in their commitment to the project. Sinn Fein needs to deliver on that pledge.
If it can't fulfil the promises it made, then there's a danger that apathy will increase among its base. What motivation would there be to return Sinn Fein to power in Stormont if it can't actually deliver for its voters?
We've been here before. Sinn Fein's anaemic approach to the DUP in the Executive a decade ago led to disillusionment among its grassroots and a fall in its vote in the 2016 Assembly election.
More expected of Sinn Fein
The strength of feeling in the republican base eventually caused the party to collapse Stormont. And more is expected of Sinn Fein now because it's the lead party in government. It badly needs a win in Jamie Bryson's legal challenge — which is backed by the DUP — on Irish language signs at Belfast's Grand Central Station.
These symbolic issues wouldn't matter quite as much if the Executive was delivering on health and public services, but it's not.
Yet the challenges facing Sinn Fein are minimal compared to those with which the DUP is grappling.
On 18%, the party is three points down on its 2022 Assembly election result which itself hardly represented rip-roaring success. The next Stormont poll may be two years away, but the DUP needs to start moving the dial upwards soon.
The Northern Ireland Protocol is the issue which continues to haunt it. The party's previous pledge that the Irish Sea Border had disappeared — and it wasn't just Sir Jeffrey Donaldson that said so — has been exposed as nonsensical. Jim Allister's election to Westminster has elevated the TUV. With Timothy Gaston an able replacement in Stormont, it now looks much more like a party than a one-man band.
That impression is aided by regular media appearances by Belfast councillor Ron McDowell and press officer Sammy Morrison.
On 12%, the TUV is up four points on its 2022 Assembly election performance. If it replicates that in 2027, then it will increase its representation in Stormont despite not being as transfer friendly as its rivals.
The UUP is up one point to 12%. Mike Nesbitt is keeping his promise to put his Health Minister role ahead of being party leader. His low-profile in the latter job hasn't hurt the party.
A shift to the right — notable recently on Irish language signs at Grand Central Station — has arguably helped with those voters who never embraced Doug Beattie's vision.
Alliance lacks direction
Alliance has a very talented MLA team, yet the party is sitting on just 13%. It lacks a clear and consistent message that resonates with the public. Repeating calls for institutional reform may be valid, but it's not inspiring or cutting through at present.
The party is perhaps paying the price for choosing to go into Government rather than Opposition.
Up one point to 3% in our poll, this is the Green Party's best score in years. If the Executive's poor record of delivery is harming Alliance, it's having the opposite effect on its smaller rival.
The Greens still have a mountain to climb in terms of regaining representation in the Assembly, but this rise will give the party heart for the hard work that lies ahead.
Unionists keenest to ‘draw line under the past’ says poll
John Manley, Political Correspondent, Irish News, May 26th, 2025
A MUCH greater number of unionists support an end to Troubles-related prosecutions compared to their nationalist counterparts, freshly published research reveals.
The same survey also highlights how younger people are more receptive to the idea of ‘drawing a line under the past’ compared to older generations.
The data, published for the first time today by The Irish News, is contained in the University of Liverpool’s 2024 general election survey and was gathered in July last year.
It shows there is no overall majority in favour or against ending prosecutions but identifies significant differences in opinion based on voting preferences and identity.
The last Tory administration introduced legislation that sought to limit criminal investigations and legal proceedings. The Labour government has pledged to repeal the so-called legacy act.
The University of Liverpool survey shows that overall, 47.9% of voters disagree with ending Troubles-related prosecutions, while 31.8% agree and 20.3% neither agree nor disagree. Most Sinn Féin (57.1%) and SDLP (58.2%) voters are opposed to ending prosecutions, compared to 44.3% of DUP voters and one-third of those who backed the Ulster Unionists (33%) in the Westminster election.
Unionists are more likely than nationalists to favour ‘drawing a line under past’, according to poll
Some 40.8% of Alliance voters disagree with scrapping legacy prosecutions, while 28% support such a move.
The greatest support for ending investigations in to conflict-era crimes comes from Ulster Unionist voters (45.8%) and their DUP supporting counterparts (38.4%).
By constitutional preference, 36.4% of unionists agree with ending prosecutions compared to 43.5% who disagree.
Some 59.2% of nationalists disagree, with 21.6% agreeing, while of those who style themselves ‘neither’, 41.7% disagree and 37.1% agree.
Of those who identify as Irish, some 57.3% disagree with an end to prosecutions, compared to 43% of those who identify as British.
When broken down by faith, less than a quarter of Protestants (23.2%) are opposed to ending legacy investigations, compared to more than half of Catholics (56.1%) and 35.9% of those of ‘no faith’.
Protestants are more likely than their Catholic counterparts to agree with ending prosecutions (39.5% Vs 24.6%), while a greater proportion of those of no faith (41.5%) advocate drawing a line under the past.
In terms of age profile, those aged 18-25 are notably more supportive than older cohorts of ending Troubles’ prosecutions.
The aftermath of 1993’s Shankill bombing in which 10 people were killed
Some 41% of 18-25-year-olds support an end to conflict-related criminal investigations, compared 36.6 opposing.
In the three older age cohorts there’s generally a 5:3 ratio in support of retaining prosecutions, with for example 51.5% of the 45-65 age group in favour of continued prosecutions, compared to 30.3% against.
Shirlow highlights changing attitudes of young
Similarly, those in third level education are more likely to back an end to prosecutions compared to the working population.
Professor Peter Shirlow, director of the Institute of Irish Studies at the University of Liverpool, said the difference in attitude to legacy among young people was “quite stark”.
“Among those in third level education it is even more significant at 50% who wish to end prosecutions compared to around 30% within the rest of the workforces,” he said.
“Overall, we find differences between unionist and nationalists and Protestants and Catholics but among 18-25 years old and students we not only find a plurality supporting the ending of prosecutions but consent to do so across these traditional boundaries.”
Prof Shirlow said that if the trend continued there was likely to be “an even greater shift towards a desire to end prosecutions within a decade”.
“This is a generation with a membership that sees legacy as distracting and belonging to an older generation,” he said.
“If one hoped for effect of legacy politics was to bring the post-conflict generation into traditional identities and attitudes, then we could suggest such a strategy is failing.”
(You first read main survey findings on our website on May 1st!)
Majority believes opinion polls should determine if referendum on Irish unity is called
Andrew Madden, Belfast Telegraph, May 26th, 2025
VIEWS CHIME WITH NIO MINISTER WHO WAS CRITICISED FOR SUGGESTION RECENTLY
A majority of people in Northern Ireland believe opinion polls should be used to determine if there should be a referendum on reunification.
Calls for a border poll have been growing in recent years, fuelled by the growth of Sinn Fein and Brexit.
As things stand, the Secretary of State is only obliged to call one if it seems likely a majority would back a united Ireland.
Last month NIO minister Fleur Anderson suggested opinion polls would help determine if or when a referendum is called.
The government subsequently distanced itself from her comments, insisting the “responsibility for a referendum sits solely with the Secretary of State”.
Now it seems that many here agree with Ms Anderson.
The latest LucidTalk survey for the Belfast Telegraph asked people what criteria they think the Secretary of State should use.
Consistent trend should trigger poll
More than half (52%) of respondents said opinion polls over a period of time — for example one or two years — which consistently show support for reunification at 50% or more, or another agreed figure, should be used.
The next most popular option was calling a poll if a consensus of civic society, including businesses, trade unions and churches, supported holding a referendum.
This was supported by 26% of those surveyed.
Twenty-two per cent of respondents said a border poll should be called if the Irish Government supported it, while 21% said a referendum should be held if a majority of Stormont MLAs from nationalist parties backed it.
The least popular option for holding a border referendum was if a majority of local MPs from non-unionist parties supported it, with only 9% support for this option.
Looking at just unionist respondents, opinion polls were still the most favoured option for holding a referendum, with 34% backing.
In terms of nationalists, 60% supported the opinion polls option.
In terms of respondents who support the Alliance Party, Greens or others, 74% favoured using opinion polls to determine whether or not to hold a border vote.
When Ms Anderson made her comments , they were met with criticism from many unionists.
DUP deputy leader Michelle McIlveen said: “A border poll is divisive and most people living here just want to make Northern Ireland work.
“Indeed, support for nationalist pro-border poll parties has remained static since 1998.
Little movement
“The combined support for the SDLP and Sinn Fein in 1998 was 39.6% and in 2022 was 38.1%.
“The suggestion by Minister Fleur Anderson that opinion polls could dictate the timing of a border poll is ill-judged.
“The agreement makes clear that such a decision rests with the Secretary of State, based on clear evidence of a likely majority for constitutional change, not some haphazard opinion poll.
“That a minister in His Majesty's Government seems ambivalent and so uncertain about maintaining the Union is quite disgraceful.”
Last month when pressed on the issue following the British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference, Secretary of State Hilary Benn insisted “nothing has changed” and a border poll remains “a long way off”.
At the time he said “there is only one criterion relating to a border poll, and it's extremely clearly laid out in the Good Friday Agreement”.
He added: “It's set out in the Belfast Good Friday Agreement. It is a political judgment for the Secretary of State at the time.
“Now, I think this is a long way off and there's so many other things for us all to be focusing on in Northern Ireland, but that long-standing position of successive governments has not changed and there's nothing more I think either of us [Hilary Benn and Fleur Anderson] can say.”
Rescue GP services before it’s too late
Deirdre Heenan, Irish News, May 26th, 2025
IN AN unprecedented move, the health minister has chosen to impose a financial settlement on GPs.
He announced to the assembly that ongoing negotiations with the BMA NI committee on the 2025/26 GP contract were over. He had unilaterally decided to bring the guillotine down.
According to his assessment, given that he has no money, further discussions are a waste of time.
He told the assembly the contract for general medical services on offer was “at the limit of what I can do”, adding that “in financial terms, the cupboard is bare, and there is no point in pretending I can serve up a sumptuous three-course meal”.
This unexpected move came shortly after the BMA in Northern Ireland had revealed that the overwhelming majority (99.6%) of GPs who took part in a referendum on the contract offered by the Department of Health rejected it.
According to the minister, the BMA had asked for £80m in extra funding, but this was simply not possible. He said that against a backdrop of a health funding gap of half a billion pounds, “giving the GPs another £80m to do what they are doing” is not an option.
Unsurprisingly, the reaction from GPs and their professional bodies was a mixture of outrage, fury, disbelief and dismay. Both the tone and the content of his statement has led to open hostility between the minister and these medics.
So how did we get to the point where there is such a gulf between the demands and expectations of GPs and the department? Is the minister right and £80m is utterly unreasonable? Where did this figure come from?
Unsustainable burden could break system
The 2024 Northern Ireland Audit Office report on access to GPs confirmed that the situation is not sustainable.
In real terms in 2022/23, their funding was cut by 7% compared to the previous year. In Northern Ireland, GP funding was just 5.4% of the total budget.
Here we come to the crux of the matter. This figure is down from a previously much higher percentage of the total budget. Traditionally 10% of the health budget went to general practice. The £80m ask represents a 1% uplift from the health budget which is £8bn.
The report also confirmed what GPs have been saying for years: that many practices are already at breaking point, with unsustainable financial pressures and staff morale at rock bottom.
They cannot afford to recruit and retain staff, which adds to their stress and negatively impacts on patient satisfaction.
“The risk is that middle class people sign up for private GPs. They take all the staff, and the NHS rump is left with no funding and the sickest patients
Health Minister Mike Nesbitt has said negotiations over a new contract for GPs are over.
For the last decade GPs have been starved of funding. In real terms their overall share of the budget has been drastically reduced whilst demand has soared.
Currently GPs here treat more than 200,000 patients every week, which equates to approximately 10 per cent of the population. The minister refers to “improving access” as though it were simply a scheduling or administrative issue. It is about capacity.
For many doctors the past few years have been a living nightmare and to add insult to injury, they are frequently depicted as work-shy moaners.
Mike Nesbitt’s lament that he has no more money for GPs has some truth to it. Somewhere in the Department of Health, at some point in time, it was decided to slash the percentage of the budget going to GPs and divert it to other areas of the system.
This did not happen by accident.
When was this decided? On what basis? This was a short-sighted, political choice which flies in the face of an agreed policy direction to shifting services from hospitals into the community.
There is time to rescue this service and it is essential that this happens quickly.
Crisis management not a viable long term option
We know from experience in Northern Ireland that crisis management is preferred over long-term strategic planning.
Already 16 GP practices have handed back their contracts and the department has been forced to step in.
This often involves finding £1,000 per day to fund locums to take over and paying all other costs. This is not just financial madness, it also negatively impacts on the continuity and quality of care.
The future is bleak: older GPs are leaving the service and younger medics are seeking alternative careers. Many have clung on in the hope that things would improve and eventually the penny would drop that the service cannot continue in its current guise.
Soaring demand and reduced funding does not add up. You can’t take feathers from a frog.
Remember free dental care, free sight care, free audiology? GPs are 10 years behind private dentistry but on exactly the same path.
The risk is that middle-class people sign up for private GPs. They take all the staff, and the NHS rump is left with no funding and the sickest patients.
In terms of GPs, the Department of Health appears to be working its way through the five stages of grief: denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.
Unfortunately, by the time we get to acceptance it will be too late.
Winter fuel reversal details could come in weeks, suggests Rayner
David Lynch, Belfast Telegraph, May 26th, 2025
Details on when winter fuel payments could be restored to more pensioners could come to light within a few weeks, Angela Rayner has suggested.
The Deputy Prime Minister indicated the Spending Review by Chancellor Rachel Reeves on June 11 could be when an announcement is made on winter fuel.
Limiting the payment to only those in receipt of a benefit called pension credit was one of the earliest moves made by the Labour Government, as it set out plans to deal with what it said was a £22 billion “black hole” in the public finances.
Sir Keir Starmer said at Prime Minister's Questions this week he wants to restore winter fuel payments to more pensioners, claiming the UK's improving economic prospects could allow for the move at the next “fiscal event”.
Many in Westminster took this to mean the budget in the autumn.
But yesterday, Sir Keir's deputy Ms Rayner suggested it could come sooner. She told Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips on Sky News: “I think that we've got the upcoming Spending Review, and I'm sure that the Chancellor will set it out when we've got the opportunity, at the first opportunity, she will set out what we'll be able to do.”
Asked if this means details on the winter fuel payment will definitely be announced at the Spending Review, Ms Rayner added: “I don't know, but I hope so.
“I mean, the Prime Minister has announced it, so logically to me that indicates that the Prime Minister wants to do something in this area. And if the Prime Minister wants to do that, I'm sure the Chancellor is going to look at how we can achieve that.”
Ministers are considering restoring the payment to all but the wealthiest pensioners, according to the Sunday Times, but could face delays rolling it out this winter due to ageing computer systems.
Communities Minister Gordon Lyons last week called for the full reinstatement of the payment, after around 250,000 people in Northern Ireland missed out on it last year.
However, £17m from a Stormont monitoring round enabled Mr Lyons to grant a £100 one-off payment to pensioners affected by the cut to winter fuel support.
The Sunday Telegraph meanwhile reported Reform UK leader Nigel Farage will commit to restoring the winter fuel payment in full, as well as scrapping the two-child benefit cap.
The move is an attempt to outflank Labour with its traditional working class supporters, sources told the Telegraph.
Sectarian hate is as wrong now as it ever was before
Pro Fide et Patria, Irish News
IT is deeply concerning that, in the Belfast of 2025, a well-organised masked gang can suddenly and viciously attack houses late in the evening for no other reason than the perceived religion of the residents.
Although sectarian tensions, particularly in the north of the city, are nothing new, with all sections of the community being targeted on different occasions, there was something both chilling and darkly familiar about the events of last Wednesday night.
A new housing development at Annalee Street and Alloa Street, in the Cliftonpark Avenue area, was only completed so recently that it has yet to be added to online maps, but some sinister elements were still determined to send out a message of hate.
“It’s so scary. I’ve been living here for six months and I’ve never had any problem with living here and now I feel like I’ve been attacked to go out of my house with my three young kids
The group of thugs threw masonry through several windows before escaping on foot, leaving young families traumatised, fearful about what the future holds for them and, on the basis of weekend reports, planning to move out.
While it is a mixed district, with people of all religions and none living happily together, Catholic homes were singled out and police have said that they are treating it as a sectarian-motivated crime.
A couple told this newspaper that one of their children, aged just two, had been asleep in a cot next to a window that was smashed, and said they were left “petrified” after the incident, which was over in a matter of moments.
“It’s so scary. I’ve been living here for six months and I’ve never had any problem with living here and now I feel like I’ve been attacked to go out of my house with my three young kids,” they said, expressing concern that perpetrators could return with petrol bombs or other weapons.
It can only cause particular alarm that sectarian intimidation in the same street dates back all the way to the start of the Troubles, during the upheavals of August, 1969.
Catholic families were burnt out at that stage, with the area left as a wasteland for a prolonged period, and it cannot be acceptable that history should repeat itself more than half a century later.
It is essential that all responsible voices are raised in support of the latest victims, although it was disappointing to note the muted response from the main unionist parties to date, so the authorities need to demonstrate that Belfast has changed over the last five decades, and what can only be regarded as ethnic cleansing will not be tolerated.
In a normal society, those from any background who are prepared to inflict sectarian violence on their neighbours must expect to swiftly find themselves behind bars.
Police review 7,500 hours of footage of NI race riots but few arrests
Liam Tunnery, Belfast Telegraph, May 26th, 2025
The number of people convicted following race-related riots in Belfast last summer is “shockingly low”, an advocacy group on immigration issues has said.
Some 49 arrests were made after trouble flared across the city following an anti-immigration protest in the city centre involving around 600 people.
The protest had been sparked by similar unrest in Great Britain after three young girls were killed at a dance party in Southport, England.
Axel Rudakubana (18) was subsequently sentenced to a minimum of 52 years in prison for the murders of Alice Da Silva Aguiar (9), Bebe King (6) and Elsie Dot Stancombe (7) on July 29, last year.
Many thousands of pounds worth of damage was caused during the disorder, with several businesses belonging to migrants torched or vandalised.
Only 43 files referred to PPS and 27 prosecutions
A total of 43 files were received by the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) from the PSNI in relation to the riots, with 27 resulting in a decision to prosecute.
The PPS said eight files were not taken forward, while a further eight remain under consideration awaiting further police material. Sixteen cases are still before the courts.
Just three people have received an immediate custodial sentence, with a further six receiving suspended sentences and one person being handed a community service order.
Fines totalling £1,405 were also handed out to a number of defendants.
A spokesperson for End Deportations Belfast — which advocates for issues faced by immigrants in Northern Ireland — criticised the justice response to the incident.
Reluctance to investigate
“These statistics are shockingly low and likely reflect a reluctance to effectively investigate,” they said.
“This illustrates many points raised in the UNCERD (United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination) report issued in August 2024, which required the DoJ (Department of Justice) to effectively tackle paramilitary violence and its role in inciting and committing hate crimes.
“Without proper investigation and enforcement, it seems that there is an ongoing strategy of tolerating an 'acceptable' level of violence.”
The PSNI said it was continuing to comb more than 7,500 hours of footage in relation to the disorder.
The Area Commander for Belfast, Chief Superintendent Jeremy Lindsay, said: “The abhorrent attacks on our ethnic minority communities and associated disorder that we have seen on our streets is completely unacceptable.
“There is an onus on us all to support those people who may be victims of hate crime, to support our communities impacted by hate, to challenge prejudice and to support police in bringing offenders to justice by making any relevant information available to police.
“It is totally unacceptable that individuals should be targeted simply because of who they are or where they come from.
“We have worked really hard to reach out to communities across NI to increase confidence in policing and to encourage individuals to report to police.
Community co-operation essential says PSNI
“Where people do so, they can expect an enhanced level of investigation and supervision of investigations and support.
“If you feel you are unable to speak with police directly you can contact the Crimestoppers Charity which guarantees you will remain completely anonymous when you contact them either via our website or on the phone.
“Anyone who has been the victim of, or has any information on, any hate crime should contact Police on 101. Alternatively, you can submit a report online using the non-emergency reporting form via http://www.psni.police.uk/makeareport/.”
You can also contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111 or online at http://crimestoppers-uk.org/.”
The PPS said they too were continuing to work on cases related to the disorder.
“Race-hate related crime is totally unacceptable, and we strongly condemn the violent disorder and other incidents which took place last summer,” said a spokesperson.
“Last summer, a team of prosecutors was formed to provide prosecutorial advice to police and to support them in building cases that could be directed upon and dealt with in the courts as quickly as possible.
“This team continues to work on files submitted by police and take decisions on these cases.
“We can assure the public that where cases meet our Test for Prosecution, they will be prosecuted at their height using offences that provide the courts with the ability to impose deterrent sentences on those who are convicted.
“We are aware that police investigations into last summer's disorder are ongoing.
“If you have been the victim of any type of hate crime, we would encourage you to report your experiences to police. You will be treated sensitively and with respect by police and prosecutors.”
The Department of Justice has also been approached for comment.
Copying British prison reforms won't addresses our very specific problems
Allison Morris, Belfast Telegraph, May 26th, 2025
Last week the UK Government announced what it called “landmark” reforms aimed at ending the current crisis in the prison system in England and Wales.
They would see sentences cut to one third to allow the earlier release of inmates and therefore end overcrowding.
Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood told the Commons she accepted most of the proposals from an independent sentencing review, but stopped short of allowing the most serious offenders from being released early.
The review, carried out by former Conservative Lord Chancellor David Gauke, suggested some serious violent and sexual offenders could be among those eligible for earlier release, which ministers rejected.
Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick labelled the plans a “get-out-of-jail-free card for dangerous criminals”.
These reforms do not extend to Northern Ireland, where the justice system is in an arguably much worse state.
When it comes to sentencing changes, there will always be the 'hang 'em and flog 'em brigade', who would cheer a return of hanging and feel prison should be a harsher punishment; only the introduction of chain gangs and the reintroduction of slopping out would satisfy them.
In reality, the best outcomes for the justice system are from rehabilitation and treating the causes of offending.
Too many sent to prison with half on remand
Here, we send too many people to prison, and keep far too many on remand awaiting trial for lengthy periods of time — half of inmates are on remand.
The sole purpose of the reforms in England and Wales is to reduce the prison population and stop jails becoming overwhelmed.
An overcrowded, understaffed prison is a dangerous one, with inmates doubled up, spending lengthy periods in lock-up.
It doesn't take an expert in prison reform to point out that this will lead to a powderkeg situation, where staff and inmates will be placed at risk.
Our jails are equally overcrowded, with the behind-bars population at the highest level since the Troubles.
Keeping people out of prison requires investment.
Extra mural investment needed
The Substance Misuse Court looks at addressing the causes of repeat offending, drug and alcohol addiction, dysfunctional family life, lack of suitable accommodation, employment and training.
Such courts have been shown to work, but are expensive to run.
It has been suggested that tagging and greater supervision, with curfews and exclusion zones, could work.
This is a form of house arrest, used in other jurisdictions, and again relies on adequate police resources.
With a shortage of PSNI and probation officers, it would require a considerable investment and would be labour intensive.
There are those who would argue rehabilitation is possible in all cases, that there are no lost causes. I disagree. I've met people who I simply do not think can be safely reintegrated back into society, but they are in the very small minority.
With the correct treatment and support, most people can be released safely and hopefully not reoffend.
Domestic abusers are most persient repeat offenders
I also disagree with shorter or reduced sentences for domestic abusers and violent sexual prisoners, as most are repeat offenders. But courts should be allowed to order mandatory and intensive courses to force them to address the harms caused by their offending.
Currently, our prisons are being used as makeshift mental health facilities.
Nor do we have an abundance of secure beds to look after those offenders who pose a risk to themselves and others as a result of their mental condition.
Judges are also — in the absence of an alternative — sending people to jail who shouldn't be there. Hydebank Wood is an example of how a prison has had to adapt because of the complex needs of the inmates.
On my last visit to the detention centre there was a woman with a mental age of eight; staff told me they recently had a woman in her 80s with severe dementia.
That isn't just the fault of the justice system, but a failure across the board with our public services.
The backlog in the courts is also contributing significantly to prison overcrowding, as is the shortage of suitable accommodation for those applying for bail.
Open prisons
The provision of an open prison for offenders not deemed to be a risk to the public would help ease the pressure.
For public confidence in justice, we need punishments that fit the crime.
Sentences must reflect the harm done by the offender or else it makes a mockery of justice and does nothing to deter a person from repeating their behaviour.
But the loss of liberty should be the punishment, not the system itself.
Brutalising a person further while behind bars might sound attractive to victims of serious crime, but all it does is create more victims by releasing a prisoner who is much more likely to reoffend.
Prison reform is badly needed, but not just copying the UK Government's approach. Instead, we should be looking at a solution bespoke to our very specific needs.
Ex-PSNI officer 'Sean' apologises and says he made up story of sectarianism
Sam McBride, Belfast Telegraph, May 26th, 2025
MAN HAD STUCK BY CLAIMS EVEN AFTER MEETING WITH CHIEF CONSTABLE
The former PSNI officer who claimed to have suffered repeated gross sectarianism from police colleagues has said that he lied and made the whole thing up — just two weeks after repeating the allegations.
Two and a half months ago, 'Sean' did an extended interview with the Belfast Telegraph in which he said he had been one of the PSNI's first Catholic recruits, but he regretted ever joining the police.
We verified his identity and put his allegations to the PSNI, which did not dispute them but said that a senior officer would meet him to discuss them. Days later, he said he was taking legal action against the PSNI.
However, on Saturday he said in a statement that he had “misled” us, that he is “deeply sorry” and that everything he'd claimed about sectarianism was “untrue and did not in fact occur”.
The statement was not sent to the Belfast Telegraph but published in the News Letter.
He gave no reason for inventing the allegations.
Our attempts to contact Sean failed, with his phone number now not taking calls.
We are continuing to protect his identity due to the genuine threat from dissident republicans which we have independently verified.
However, we can now report that two weeks ago, Sean privately told us he continued to stand over his allegations.
A fortnight ago, Chief Constable Jon Boutcher went to the Policing Board to say he'd met Sean and was highly impressed by the “thoroughly decent” former officer.
However, bizarrely, he said he was also satisfied that there had been no sectarianism.
When pressed by UUP MLA Alan Chambers on whether Sean had stood over his allegations, Mr Boutcher said he wouldn't discuss the issue further.
The Belfast Telegraph spoke to Sean that afternoon to ask for clarification on what had been said in the meeting with Mr Boutcher.
Referring to the sectarianism he now says didn't happen, he told us: “At the end of the day, this is something that's happened me and now it's been totally denied from the top down, so where do I stand? How do I make it more truer.”
He went on: “I spoke to the Chief Constable. We had a great conversation... I explained my experiences and now I've had this today that he's said nothing's happened. I don't know what's going on…”
When we put to him that the Chief Constable's statement at the Policing Board — where he said Sean was an impressive individual but so was his former unit — left the situation confused because either the incidents happened or didn't happen, he said: “Of course.”
He said the reason he wasn't asking for an investigation into the allegations was that he had “no confidence” in the PSNI handling of such claims.
Pretending that he was dropping his legal action for reasons other than that the claims were untrue, he said it would “cost a terrible lot of money” to take a legal case.
Referring to the Policing Board meeting, he said he was “so surprised” to hear what Mr Boutcher said because “the story I told him was basically the story I told you”.
He went on: “When I've got the Chief Constable coming out today and saying 'well, there is nothing', that just deflates me. I just feel for all the other officers in the PSNI now; they don't have a voice.”
On Saturday, Sean said the opposite, describing his former colleagues as “outstanding police officers and wonderful human beings”.
He said: “The allegations I made are all untrue. I am unequivocal about that. Nobody subjected me to sectarian abuse for wearing ash on my forehead.
“Not once did I hear Catholic colleagues being referred to as 'fenian b******ds'. I never heard colleagues whistling the sash in corridors.
Apology but no explanations
“I am deeply sorry that I claimed I had experienced sectarian abuse or witnessed sectarianism in the PSNI… I am also truly sorry that I misled the Belfast Telegraph and by extension the public.”
Sean gave no clear explanation for why he'd behaved as he did, beyond saying that he'd been medically discharged from the PSNI with complex PSTD and “being unwell has also made me vulnerable in ways upon which I do not wish to expand on publicly”.
Days after his interview was published, Sean became a client of prominent Belfast solicitor Kevin Winters, who put out a statement on his behalf in which he said he was going to sue the PSNI over the discrimination.
After the Policing Board, Sean then got Mr Winters to issue a statement in which he said he stood over every word of his interview.
After being unable to contact Sean yesterday, we spoke to Mr Winters. He said: “Given solicitor-client confidentiality, we can make no comment suffice to say that any previous representations made were on instruction.”
On Saturday, Mr Boutcher issued a statement in which he made no criticism of Sean for his dishonesty, despite that leading to anger and hurt among his former colleagues.
Instead, the Chief Constable said: “I want to acknowledge Sean's courageous decision to issue this statement and I urge everyone to respect Sean's plea for privacy”. Mr Boutcher emphasised that “there was no sectarianism in this case” and said he was “grateful to Sean for setting the record straight”.
He added: “After my meeting with Sean I described him as a decent man and his statement of retraction is nothing short of what I expected. To their huge credit, the very colleagues Sean criticised also described him to me as a good and decent man.”
