When Britain decided that unionists were the problem

BRIAN FEENEY, Irish News, November 14th, 2025

TOMORROW is the 40th anniversary of the Anglo-Irish Agreement (AIA), signed at Hillsborough by Garret FitzGerald and Margaret Thatcher with hordes of unionists ranting outside the gates.

You don’t much hear about it now, but it broke the mould that had set the parameters of British-Irish relations since 1921.

Successive British governments were adamantly opposed to any involvement by Dublin in the north’s affairs. Representations by the Irish government in the early days of the Troubles were rebuffed as encroachments on UK sovereignty.

By 1973 it was obvious that the Irish government’s views could not be ignored, especially since by then, one of the pillars of British policy was the recognition of ‘an Irish dimension’ in the north’s affairs.

Secondly, events in the north were manifestly not a purely UK domestic problem, when loyalist terrorists were killing innocent citizens in the south with bombs made in the north.

Whereas the 1973 Sunningdale Agreement was primarily to devise structures to enable the north’s parties to share power – the other pillar of British policy – the Anglo-Irish Agreement was a treaty between the UK and Ireland excluding the north’s parties. It was the first major breach in Britain’s unyielding position on sovereignty.

It broke the hermetically-sealed unionist sub-polity invented in 1921. The Republic would have an advisory and consultative role in the north.

It’s worth quoting the provisions in the AIA which established that.

An Anglo-Irish Conference

“The UK government accept that the Irish government will put forward views and proposals on matters relating to Northern Ireland within the field of the [Anglo-Irish] Conference in so far as those matters are not the responsibility of a devolved administration.

“In the interests of promoting peace and stability, determined efforts shall be made through the Conference to resolve any differences.

“The Conference will be mainly concerned with Northern Ireland; but some of the matters under consideration will involve cooperative action in both parts of the island of Ireland, and possibly also in GB.”

Big stuff. A permanent secretariat was established at Maryfield, beside Holywood’s Palace barracks, staffed 24 hours a day by British and Irish officials.

Northern nationalist politicians could contact Irish officials at any time to complain about security force behaviour or breaches of other provisions in the AIA such as the requirement, routinely ignored by the British, for the RUC to accompany

British army and UDR patrols.

Regular ‘travellers’ from the Department of Foreign Affairs would meet influential figures in the north to ascertain their opinions on social, economic and security matters to aid the Irish government “to put forward views and proposals” to the British.

‘A majority of people’

Two other aspects were important. First, no change in ‘the status of Northern Ireland’ was reaffirmed ‘without the consent of a majority of the people’. Notice ‘a’ majority and no mention of a vote by a legislature as the 1949 Ireland Act stated. It’s the origin of the border poll.

Secondly, the AIA ended the veto unionists had developed not only on constitutional change but on any change whatsoever in the north.

They wanted this place frozen in aspic in 1921. Changes happened despite unionist opposition.

The British had decided unionists were the problem.

Unionists met any proposals to ameliorate the dreadful state of the north in the Troubles with an irrational, unreasoned, intransigent response. They made no proposal, no offer. They just said “No!”.

John Hume said if the word ‘no’ was removed from English, unionists would be speechless.

Predictably, unionists said no to the AIA and then they did their usual thing. Protests, marches, rallies.

Living up to their record as the most lawless and seditious community in these islands, they fell back on their tried and trusted methods: violence and the threat of violence.

They tried to storm the Maryfield secretariat, they threatened a ‘day of action’ led by the UVF and UDA.

Peter Robinson led a rabble into the Monaghan village of Clontibret. Some buildings were vandalised, two gardaí injured and Robinson arrested. He was later fined £IR15,000.

The British anticipated all this lawlessness and intimidation and had planned for it. It was futile because there was no tangible political structure unionists could wreck.

No friends in high places

Thatcher remained impervious. Unionists demonstrated they had no friends in high places and no longer controlled the north. The Commons passed the AIA by 473-47.

The AIA was an enormous breakthrough and set the tone for future cooperation between Dublin and London. Essentially its structures remain in the Good Friday Agreement.

It’s now a British-Irish Intergovernmental Conference where Dublin puts forward views and proposals. There’s still a secretariat in Belfast staffed by Irish officials.

The updated structures are still the only place where any progress is made because unionists still say no to everything.

Forty years on, the Anglo-Irish Agreement has proved its worth

Sean Donlon, Irish Times, November 12th, 2025

Anglo-Irish relations were particularly gloomy four decades ago, following the 1981 IRA H-Block hunger strikes and Charlie Haughey’s anti-British approach during the Falklands conflict.

In Northern Ireland, there was no prospect of agreement, nor was there the possibility even of negotiations between the political parties, with deaths from The Troubles averaging about 100 a year.

Despite all of the difficulties, Garret FitzGerald and Margaret Thatcher went on to sign the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement 40 years ago this month, following FitzGerald’s decision to open talks after she was re-elected in June 1983.

Lengthy negotiations involving officials followed, led by Dermot Nally on the Irish side and Robert Armstrong on the British side, with FitzGerald and Thatcher closely engaged throughout.

On the political side, Dick Spring, Peter Barry and Michael Noonan played central roles on the Irish side, and British foreign secretary Geoffrey Howe, Jim Prior, Douglas Hurd and Tom King on the British.

‘With a Common Purpose’

Despite the political temperature leading into the talks, differences faded until, as Robert Armstrong put it, “well before the end of the process ... the two sides were negotiating as one, with a common purpose.”

FitzGerald’s objectives were clear. Prompted by John Hume, he had in 1983 established the New Ireland Forum of Irish nationalist political parties to debate how a lasting peace could be brought about democratically, and not by the gun.

Thatcher’s position on Ireland was more difficult to define, however. She wanted to “do something” about Ireland, but often it appeared that her only objectives were to copper-fasten the union and improve cross-Border security co-operation.

In the words of David Goodall, her senior adviser on Irish matters, she had a temperamental dislike of things Irish and “wrestled repeatedly and frankly with the thought that there could perhaps be no final settlement in Northern Ireland until the British withdrew and left the two communities there to come to terms with one another”.

Each side began ambitiously. The British sought the abandonment of Articles 2 and 3 of the Irish Constitution, or, if that was not possible, a court-proof form of words where Dublin accepted the existence of the union.

In turn, the Irish side essentially sought joint authority in Northern Ireland, with the two governments jointly in charge of the security forces and an all-Ireland court. In addition, everyone in Northern Ireland would be formally entitled to British and Irish citizenship.

Neither side warmed to the other’s opening ideas, and it was some time before Thatcher accepted that if she wanted formal Irish acceptance of the union, then Dublin would have to be given a political role of some kind in Northern Ireland.

Brighton and ‘Out! Out! Out!’

Two events near the end of 1984 could have derailed the negotiations, led by the IRA’s attempt in October to assassinate Thatcher at the Conservative Party conference in Brighton. Remarkably, it did not deflect her.

In November, Thatcher’s “out! out! out!” rejection of the main recommendations of the New Ireland Forum threatened to destabilise, if not destroy, the negotiations.

Following contacts with Washington, US president Ronald Reagan helped to keep her on side despite her doubts, leading him subsequently to tell House speaker Tip O’Neill that she would go with the talks.

Negotiations resumed in the new year. Eight months later, the main issues were resolved, including the drafting of a joint press communique that was agreed upon without much difficulty.

In an attempt to head off problems, a list of 60 questions that might be put to the two leaders by journalists following signing of the agreement were worked out, laboriously.

The exercise was taken seriously by FitzGerald and Thatcher, with both studying “the catechism”, including rehearsals to make sure that the answers stuck to the script.

The text – an international treaty later registered with the United Nations – was signed in Hillsborough on November 15th, beginning with an affirmation that “any change in the status of Northern Ireland would only come about with the consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland” and went on to “recognise that the present wish of the people of Northern Ireland is for no change in the status of Northern Ireland”.

For the first time, it gave Dublin a formal voice in the affairs of Northern Ireland, with new structures to let it make inputs into the internal affairs of Northern Ireland as long as direct rule from London was in place. The Irish government would be entitled to advance views and proposals, and the two governments were required to make determined efforts to resolve differences. In effect, if Northern Ireland’s parties could not agree to share power to run the place, then Dublin and London would do it without them.

A joint Anglo-Irish Secretariat

Agreements need people to run them. A joint Anglo-Irish Secretariat was set up in Maryfield on the outskirts of Belfast. The Irish members of the secretariat, from the Departments of Foreign Affairs and Justice, became the first Dublin civil servants to have a permanent presence in Northern Ireland since partition. Much credit is due to them. Their combined offices/residence became the focal point for sustained loyalist protests. Despite the challenges, they persevered with the task of implementing the agreement, despite the primitive living conditions and the constant threat to their safety.

Approved by the Dáil and House of Commons, the agreement was widely welcomed internationally. In Washington, Reagan and O’Neill jointly backed it, not just with words, but also with deeds.

Honouring the pledge made by US president Jimmy Carter in 1977 that “in the event of a settlement, the US would be prepared to join with others to see how additional job-creating investment could be encouraged to the benefit of all the people of Northern Ireland”, the two paved the way for the creation of the International Fund for Ireland.

Foreign aid but communities remained divided

In the decades since, the United States, along with the European Union, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, have contributed nearly $1 billion to fund projects in Northern Ireland and in Border counties, changing lives, changing futures.

The agreement did little to bring the communities in Northern Ireland together, but it contributed hugely to the normalisation of relations between Dublin and London. Much of the substance of joint authority was achieved.

Over time, unionists came to see that their only way back to government was to get rid of the 1985 agreement and to share power with nationalists – a realisation that led to the negotiation of the Belfast Agreement in 1998.

That agreement included the formal abrogation of the one agreed 40 years ago this month, though much of its substance and even its language is fully preserved within the later text. The Anglo-Irish Agreement brought about positive change.

Seán Donlon was a member of the team of officials which negotiated the 1985 agreement

At the time ‘We sensed we were witnessing a historic event’

Stephen Collins, Irish Times, November 14th, 2025

The importance of the Anglo-Irish Agreement is sometimes overlooked, but it was the foundation on which all subsequent progress has been based

I was one of a group of bleary-eyed journalists and government officials who boarded an early-morning plane at Dublin Airport 40 years ago this week, clutching an Aer Lingus ticket listing the destination as: “unknown”. We knew we were on our way to the signing of a deal between Irish and British governments on the future of Northern Ireland, but the venue was a secret.

Before the plane took off, there was speculation about whether it would be Dromoland Castle in Co Clare, Hillsborough in Co Down or even somewhere in England. As the plane headed north up the Irish Sea coast it quickly became clear that we were on our way to Hillsborough.

After landing at Belfast we were taken by bus past groups of protesting loyalist demonstrators to the pretty village of Hillsborough. We waited for hours outside the castle gates until Garret FitzGerald and Margaret Thatcher were ready for the formal signing ceremony and the subsequent press conference.

Watching the taoiseach and the prime minister putting their names to the international agreement, there was a palpable sense that we were witnessing a historic event. Although the importance of the Anglo-Irish Agreement is sometimes overlooked, it was the foundation on which all subsequent progress has been based.

The hinge on which the peace process depended.

Philip Stephens, author of These Divided Isles, a superb history of Anglo-Irish relations since 1922, said at the recent launch of his book in Dublin that the agreement was the hinge on which the peace process depended.

The key elements were a role for the Irish government in the running of Northern Ireland and the acceptance by both countries of the principle of consent. The Irish side accepted that the North would remain part of the United Kingdom as long as the majority living there desired it, while the British agreed a united Ireland could come about if a majority in the North voted for it.

In the two years of intense negotiations leading up to the agreement, FitzGerald had pressed for joint authority over the North while Thatcher tried to limit it to a consultative role for the Irish government. In the event, the outcome was somewhere between the two, with the Irish having an official presence in Belfast to engage in the administration of the North.

The key officials who put the agreement together were cabinet secretaries Dermot Nally on the Irish side and his British counterpart Robert Armstrong. Senior officials Michael Lillis and David Goodall drove the work. This is how Goodall later explained the origins of the process. “In September 1983 in Dublin, Michael Lillis invited me to take a quiet walk with him along the Grand Canal, and proceeded to sketch out the possibility of radically new arrangements for Northern Ireland. He made it clear that these were not yet the ideas of the Irish government, but indicated that they were the lines on which the taoiseach was thinking.” Goodall rose to the occasion, briefed Thatcher, and the rest is history.

Fierce resistance by DUP and PIRA

The agreement, which owed much of its inspiration to John Hume, met with intense opposition from unionists and was rejected by Sinn Féin and the IRA, which continued its campaign of violence. FitzGerald’s ability to persuade Thatcher to conclude it was a remarkable achievement, particularly given that the IRA almost succeeded in killing her during the negotiations with the bombing of the Conservative conference in Brighton.

As well as dealing with Thatcher, FitzGerald had to face the unremitting hostility of Charles Haughey, who – as Diarmaid Ferriter writes today – did everything in his power to derail the negotiations. In a move that some felt could even be described as treasonous, Haughey dispatched his deputy leader Brian Lenihan to lobby leading Irish-American politicians to oppose the agreement. House speaker Tip O’Neill and Senator Ted Kennedy angrily rebuffed Haughey’s approach but it didn’t stop him denouncing the agreement in the Dáil as the surrender of the Irish constitutional claim to the whole island of Ireland.

The cynicism of Haughey’s approach was illustrated when he took office as a minority government a little more than a year later and proceeded to use the agreement. Subsequent taoisigh Albert Reynolds and Bertie Ahern continued to build on FitzGerald’s achievement, culminating in the Belfast Agreement of 1998. They had the advantage of a patriotic opposition led by John Bruton, who backed their efforts rather than trying to obstruct them.

Haughey’s stance rebounded on him as Des O’Malley and Mary Harney voted for the agreement in the Dáil. They went on to launch the Progressive Democrats a month later and prevented Haughey winning an expected overall majority in 1987. That left him with no choice but to follow the economic and northern policies laid down by FitzGerald.

A key element of the agreement was that unionists could regain a role in the administration of the North if they accepted power sharing, and David Trimble eventually signed up. The other side of the coin was the republican movement’s ultimate acceptance of the new constitutional dispensation as the basis for ending violence. That is the enduring legacy of the Anglo-Irish Agreement.

The coming 40th anniversary of the disastrous Anglo Irish Agreement

By Ben Lowry, News Letter, November 14th, 2025

Since then, influential political and official voices have slyly given credence to that disastrous deal, although mostly it is ignored in favour of celebration of the later Belfast Agreement. But unionists had to concede very bad things in 1998 due to what Margaret Thatcher forced on them in 1985.

The AIA has, over time, helped the IRA, although I accept that its authors – on either side of the Irish Sea – did not seek that outcome.

Most of the problems that unionists face today were sown that day, November 15 1985: above all the incessant, as-of-right interference in Northern Ireland affairs by hypocritical Irish politicians. This has led to other horrors, including the legacy catastrophe and betrayal, in which the UK security forces who prevented civil war face, at best, denunciation, at worst criminal trial – while IRA enjoy de facto amnesty on both sides of the border. Also the provocative and triumphalist (and, again, hypocritical) use of Gaelic.

The immediate impact of the deal was minimal. It was the long-term impact that mattered. A decade ago I wrote that it had taken me 30 years to understand the AIA’s implications. Next week I will give updated thoughts on it.

Former member says Presbyterian Church handling of scandal is a 'sick pantomime'

BRETT CAMPBELL, Belfast Telegraph, November 14th, 2025

FEARS THERE COULD BE A LOT MORE THAN THREE VICTIMS AS KIRKPATRICK STRUGGLES TO COMPREHEND EVENTS

A former Presbyterian academic has warned the church “is on the road to perdition” as he branded its handling of a safeguarding scandal “a sick pantomime”.

Laurence Kirkpatrick, who settled a legal case after being sacked from his position at the Presbyterian-run Union Theological College back in 2019 over comments he made on a radio show, said he is still struggling to comprehend what unfolded in Assembly Buildings on Wednesday.

The ex-lecturer said the resignation of Moderator Rev Trevor Gribben and the handling of a press conference where he refused to take questions raises more questions than it answers.

“It's unprecedented — it hasn't happened in 185 years,” Mr Kirkpatrick said.

“I think you have to ask, 'Was he pushed or did he jump?', and I do wonder if other issues were coming to the fore. It's all a little bit strange and the so-called press conference was a sick pantomime.”

It comes as the PSNI confirmed it is engaged in ongoing discussions with the Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI) to ensure mechanisms are in place to support anyone who wishes to report abuse.

Mr Kirkpatrick, who is no longer a member of the PCI after settling a tribunal case against the Presbyterian-run college where he lectured for decades, said the safeguarding revelations came as a surprise to him and to the majority of church members.

‘There's no leadership from the church’

“So many ordinary Presbyterians are horrified by how this unfolded and are asking big questions, but there's no leadership from the church,” he added.

“They just made their announcement, closed up shop and hope it will all blow over — that's just appalling.”

This newspaper understands that a number of presbyteries held emergency meetings on Wednesday night after the church admitted “serious and significant” shortcomings which resulted in people being harmed and others put at risk.

It also revealed that an internal report found that the failings were “magnified” by “major gaps” in record-keeping between 2009 and 2022.

Dr Gribben confirmed he has been permitted to retire from his other roles as Clerk of the Assembly and General Secretary as he expressed profound regret.

Convener of the General Council, Rev Dr David Bruce, also apologised for a “basic failure” to follow the church's own Taking Care guidance introduced a number of years ago.

Mr Kirkpatrick said the media briefing was “choreographed from start to finish”.

“They announced they've already conducted the report but we're not seeing it. They can't say 'just trust us'.

“And how can you can conclude such a report before setting up the helpline to determine the scale?”

Mr Kirkpatrick accused those who hold the levers of power within the church of acting like James Bond villains when members raise concerns.

‘Sharks in the basement’

“It's like there's somebody in Church House sitting stroking a wee white cat under a spotlight, there's sharks in the basement and you go through the trapdoor,” he said.

“That's a caricature, but it's pretty near the truth.”

Yesterday, a Stormont minister expressed concerns over the “lack of clarity” from the church which he is a member of.

DUP MLA Gordon Lyons expressed shock after it emerged that issues include a failure to respond when people who had suffered harm sought help and instances where offenders returned to worship in church but were “inadequately monitored”.

“I think a lot of people will be concerned at what has been said and also concerned at what hasn't been said,” the Communities Minister told Good Morning Ulster.

“I don't think we have been furnished with all the information, obviously we haven't seen this review and there does seem to be a lack of clarity as to what is happening, so I hope there is more information that can be provided.”

The church said it was aware of three people who have been impacted by failings from congregations on both sides of the border, but it's feared the true number of victims could be much higher.

Detective Chief Superintendent Zoe McKee, head of the PSNI's Public Protection Branch, said the force remains committed to working with all relevant agencies and organisations “to ensure that robust safeguarding measures are in place to protect vulnerable individuals”.

Lord John Alderdice has also accused the church leadership of not doing enough to deal with the crisis.

“What you saw [on Wednesday] was not openness and transparency. It was a damage limitation exercise,” the former Alliance Party leader said.

The former Presbyterian elder, who resigned from the role in 2018, co-authored a 150-page report containing a series of allegations of a culture of bullying and abuse of power in the church.

The Charity Commission, which has been engaging with PCI over the dossier, has requested a copy of the safeguarding report.

A spokeswoman said it is currently reviewing information provided by the church under the serious incident reporting process and is taking steps to ensure the protection of beneficiaries and restore confidence.

'Changes can't be made without putting the victims and survivors first'

NIAMH CAMPBELL, Belfast Telegraph, November 14th, 2025

A campaigner who was indecently assaulted as a child by a church youth leader has said survivors must be placed at the centre of any reforms by the Presbyterian Church in Ireland (PCI).

Nikella Holmes spoke out following the resignation of PCI leader Dr Trevor Gribben on Wednesday, amid “serious and significant” safeguarding failings.

Ms Holmes (34) was a teenager when she was attacked by former chief fire officer Gary Thompson, who was sentenced to eight months in prison last December after admitting two counts of indecent assault.

She said she had been groomed by Thompson from the moment she met him at the non-denominational, independent Victory Praise Church in Ballymena, her hometown

The offending took place over four months in 2006, when Ms Holmes was 15 and Thompson was 38

She is now a member of a reference group for the Executive Office's research into historical clerical child abuse, and is passionate about raising awareness of grooming and highlighting the need for safeguarding and training in faith and voluntary organisations.

‘A lot more to come out’

Ms Holmes said: “I'm not surprised [at the resignation], in that I genuinely think there's a lot more to come out [...] but I am surprised at the same [time], because my issue has been independent churches, in that they lacked accountability.

“In the PCI, you have so many levels within that structure for accountability, and yet that's not there [in independent churches].

“The majority of churches are registered with the Charity Commission, which has asked the PCI for a copy of [the] internal report which found serious and significant failings.”

Ms Holmes said churches should “have a safeguarding policy in place to be able to sign up as a charity”.

She continued: “No one ever checks that this stuff is being followed, no one ever does.

“The church kitchen is checked once a year by environmental health, yet no one checks the safeguarding policies, no one checks that child protection is being followed.

“There's no legal repercussions. I'm currently working within social services. Can you imagine if someone found out I didn't report something?

“The PCI has stepped in and monitored it. Great, [but] where's the legal ramifications? Where's the ministers that didn't follow [up] on that report? The youth leaders who didn't take that seriously?

“We don't know the full details, but there's individuals that technically have committed crimes because they haven't reported offences within the church.”

In his resignation statement, Dr Gribben said: “We are aware of a number of people who have been harmed, and we believe there may well be others as yet unknown to us. We apologise unreservedly for this.

“The church's first and greatest concern about this is for those people who have suffered harm, and those who have been put at risk.

“The PCI profoundly regrets this, is deeply grieved and will offer all possible support to those affected.

“Although not directly responsible for the professional delivery of safeguarding within the church, nonetheless serious and significant failings in our central safeguarding functions occurred partly during my tenure as general secretary.”

No understanding of trauma

Ms Holmes criticised the approach, saying the PCI's invitation for survivors to “come and tell us about it” was not informed by any understanding of trauma.

She said victims should not be expected to report their experiences to the same institution that caused them harm, and insisted that any investigation or reform must be led by independent external bodies.

Ms Holmes continued: “I think the main message from me and from the Northern Ireland Survivor Council is, 'Nothing about us, without us'.

“I think they cannot make changes without putting victims and survivors first.”

While the specific details of the failings within the church are yet to be revealed, Ms Holmes said the leaders of the PCI “need to understand the stories of those victims before they can make real change”.

She added: “They cannot be the people to [lead reform]. [Victims] need to have a safe space that doesn't involve [the PCI] to come forward and tell their stories.”

Earlier this week, PCI convenor Rev David Bruce told a press conference: “Our primary concern is the people who have been harmed, placed at risk, or who simply didn't hear from us when they needed help or guidance.

“We have let you down, and for this I am truly sorry. It should not have happened.

“I want you to know that we will do everything we can to both put in place better arrangements to prevent this occurring again, and to put the appropriate help and support in place for you now.

“Anyone in our congregations, or those more broadly associated with us, either now or in the past, who may have been impacted can contact us directly.

“I would reassure anyone contacting the team that they will be listened to, heard and responded to, as they should have been previously.”

Presbyterian Church has ‘work to do’ to regain trust after safeguarding failures

By Jonathan McCambridge, PA, Belfast News Letter, November 14th, 2025

The Presbyterian Church in Ireland has a "lot of work to do" to regain trust after admitting failures around safeguarding, the chairwoman of the Safeguarding Board for Northern Ireland has said.

Bernie McNally also said the Church may need external support to set up a governance system that members can have confidence in.

The Church announced this week that moderator Rev Trevor Gribben is to stand down after a review found "serious and significant failings" in central safeguarding functions from the period 2009 to 2022.

It emerged that failures included situations where the Church did not respond when people who had suffered harm sought help and instances where offenders returned to worship in church but were "inadequately monitored".

The Presbyterian Church has since faced pressure to release more information about the safeguarding issues involved.

On Thursday, the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) said it is engaged in ongoing discussions with the Church to ensure mechanisms are in place to support anyone who wishes to report abuse.

The PSNI said discussions began after concerns were raised by the Church following the conviction of an individual in 2024 for child sexual offences.

Ms McNally is chairwoman of the Safeguarding Board for Northern Ireland , a statutory body responsible for co-ordinating and improving child protection efforts across Northern Ireland .

She told the BBC that she understood that people were anxious for more information, but said that due process had to be followed.

She said: "They need to set up a system so the voices of victims and potential victims can be heard.

External advice on child protection

"They need to get some external advice on how to deal with child protection or vulnerable adult issues because they clearly need support and help to do that.

"Thirdly, they probably need some external help, like a panel of experts to help them set up a new governance system.

"A system that people can have confidence in, a system victims could have confidence in and their congregations could have confidence in because this is all about trust now."

She added: "I think people will be very distressed. I would imagine the congregations will be very distressed.

"I think sometimes when there is a vacuum it is filled with misinformation."

Ms McNally said: "Pastoral care at this stage is going to be vital to reassure those congregations who have put such faith in the Church, they have put their trust in the Church, they have spent their whole lives being loyal to this institution.

"I think the Church has a lot of work to do to regain that trust."

The Presbyterian Church in Ireland has around 180,000 members belonging to more than 500 congregations across 19 regional presbyteries across the island.

Mosque terror suspect attended SF conference addressed by Catherine Connolly

FIONNÁN SHEAHAN, Belfast Telegraph and Irish Independent, November 14th, 2025

MAN ARRESTED IN GARDA FAR-RIGHT EXTREMISM PROBE

A far-right terrorism suspect in a plot to attack a mosque is a Sinn Fein activist.

The man arrested yesterday in a garda investigation into far-right extremism attended a party rally addressed by Irish President Catherine Connolly just six weeks ago.

The party activist is being held under Section 30 of the Republic's Offences Against the State Act.

He was photographed with Mary Lou McDonald during last year's Irish general election campaign. He has also been seen locally putting up posters for party events.

Sinn Fein says he is not a member of the party. However, the man's partner has been expelled from Sinn Fein after he was arrested and their home was searched by gardaí.

The couple visited Leinster House in Dublin on two occasions in the past six months as guests of a Sinn Fein senator.

The man was arrested by members of the Special Detective Unit investigating cross-border terrorism.

Two other men who were charged with possession and control of explosives were remanded in custody after they appeared in court last week.

The court heard a violent right-wing extremist group threatened on video to attack a mosque in Galway, IPAS centres and hotels housing migrants around Ireland.

United Ireland conference

The man in custody and his partner attended a Sinn Fein conference on a united Ireland in Dublin six weeks ago. The event was addressed by President Connolly as she was on the campaign trail.

Sinn Fein says the man was turned down for membership twice. Yet he still attended the party's delegate conference in October and was photographed with a party ID badge on him.

“No, he is not a member. He applied for membership of the party on November 21 2024 and again on August 28 2025 but was not accepted into membership. He was at the unity conference, along with his partner, who was a member but has since been expelled,” a party spokesperson said.

The party confirmed the suspect and his partner were in the Dail twice this year.

Sinn Fein said the partner of a female member of the party had been arrested as part of the garda investigation into “two alleged far-right extremists”.

“We will not allow our party to be exposed to any far-right elements. The far right have targeted our party for several years now with death threats, pickets on members' homes and offices, and, more recently, violent actions,” the party said.

Sinn Fein said the “speedy” action of gardaí had prevented “potentially devastating events occurring”.

“The party was informed on Friday night that the home of a female party member and her partner had been raided, and he has since been arrested.

“The female party member was expelled from the party on Saturday evening as she failed to notify the party that her home was raided or inform the party about the associated seriousness of this situation.”

The Sinn Fein link to the arrested terror suspect comes after a court was last weekend told that a man allegedly caught by gardaí with an explosive substance was planning a terror attack on behalf of a violent right-wing extremist group.

A video was also recovered of a “practice statement” in which masked men took responsibility for an attack on a Galway mosque and threatened to carry out further attacks on migrant accommodation in Ireland, with gardaí outlining concerns of further terror attacks being planned if Garrett Pollock (35) was given bail.

Pollock and a co-accused, Karolis Peckauskas (38), were brought before a special sitting of Portlaoise District Court after being arrested as part of a terrorism investigation involving the Special Detective Unit (SDU), the PSNI, and gardaí in Laois.

Pollock, of Kilhorne Green in Annalong, Co Down, is charged with possessing an explosive substance at his home address, outside of the state, on November 5, 2025. The charge relates to possession of components for three pipe bomb type improvised explosive devices (IED) and four incendiary type IEDs with white dish cloth wicks.

He is also charged with possessing an explosive substance at O'Moore Place in Portlaoise on November 4.

Loyalist gun attack victim with terminal cancer says that time running out to settle case

CONNLA YOUNG CRIME AND SECURITY CORRESPONDENT, Irish News, November 14th, 2025

A LOYALIST gun attack victim battling terminal cancer has voiced frustrations over delays in concluding settlement talks with the PSNI and Ministry of Defence.

Paddy Gribben was shot four times when a UVF gang opened fire inside the Thierafurth Inn in Kilcoo, Co Down, as a darts tournament was taking place on November 19, 1992.

Another man, Peter McCormack (42), was killed during the attack, which is believed to have involved collusion.

Lawyers for Mr Gribben, who was diagnosed with brain cancer in 2018, have been involved in ongoing settlement discussions with the PSNI and Ministry of Defence (MoD).

The father-of-three has spoken of his frustration that agreement has yet to be reached with the state security agencies.

On the night of the attack, Mr Gribben, who was aged 19, was helping to organise the darts tournament in his local pub.

Now aged 53, he revealed how he has been haunted by the sectarian attack for the past 33 years.

“I wouldn’t wish it on the boys that shot me,” he said.

“I had dreams that when you waken up you’d smell the gun smoke, I’d read about that with people coming home from Vietnam.”

Mr Gribben, who lived close to Lough Island Reavy in Kilcoo, has told how he was overcome by dark thoughts in the years after he was shot and injured.

“I was getting up in the middle of the night, maybe 3am…I lived about a mile from that lake,” he said.

“When I would have went to the lake, I had no torch, and the reflection of the water was the only thing you really saw.

“And throwing stones in it you’d say, ‘throw yourself in the next time’. I wouldn’t think of doing it now, because of the kids and everything.”

Night terrors

He revealed details of the night terrors he suffered after the loyalist attack, which include a suspected sectarian killer, who cannot be named for legal reasons.

“I had a dream one night that four men walked into my room, it was as realistic as I am sitting here,” he said.

“They all started shooting at me and I started bouncing in the bed. The four of them left and this boy pulled off his balaclava and said ‘we’ll get you the next time’ – and it was (named loyalist).”

Such was the trauma of the nightmares he faced, Mr Gribben prayed for release.

“I got out of bed and I prayed ‘God, stop giving me these nightmares, give me cancer’,” he said.

In 2018 he was diagnosed with brain cancer.

“They couldn’t do an MRI because one of the bullets is lodged in my shoulder,” he explained.

He revealed that another bullet recovered from his shoulder in the years after the attack was handed over by the hospital to forensics experts.

Mr Gribben said he is currently undergoing “long chemo” as part of his cancer treatment after initially being given five years to live.

“It’s hard to walk and I am tired all the time but such is life,” he said.

“You still have the memories of the shooting too, which doesn’t help you, they never leave.”

When he was shot, Mr Gribben was sitting beside Peter McCormack, who lost his life in the pub attack.

He has vivid memories of speaking with the retired school teacher in the seconds before the gunmen entered the country bar.

“I never knew Peter until that night,” he said.

“I knew Peter McCormack for ten minutes. I sat down beside him and ordered a pint and he said to me ‘Young Gribben….how are you?

“I said ‘not too bad, I know you’re McCormack, I don’t know your first name, and he said, ‘Peter’. I said, ‘good man Peter’.”

As he and Mr McCormack had an everyday conversation, they were unaware that a loyalist killer gang was stalking the bar they were in.

Mr Gribben said he and Mr McCormack continued to chat as the killers entered the bar.

“Then he said to me ‘what cooking ingredients, when you spell it forward, is spelled the same way backwards?

“And I goes, ‘Peter, you’ll help me’, he says ‘Oxo’.

Shot in the back with shotgun

“There’s a mirror behind the bar that looks at the door and as soon as he said ‘Oxo’ that door opened and the Grim Reaper walked in….they shot him in the back with a shotgun… nightmare.”

“I went straight to the floor and then they were firing all around the place.”

He revealed how after being struck several times a gunman stood over him and fired a final shot into his back.

Mr Gribben said continued delays in reaching a settlement with the PSNI and MoD are frustrating.

“Now that I have cancer, I can’t do nothing,” he said.

“I’m not allowed to work, nothing. And I would love to get away on a holiday and I asked my doctor could I fly and they said ‘no problem, you’re alright to fly’.

“So, as soon as I get it, I’m away for a week.” He added any settlement reached would make a difference to his life. “I am slowing down now, I get up in the morning it’s hard to walk.” He said time is an issue.

“This is the second year I have passed the test, I don’t think there will be many more,” he said.

Mr Gribben’s solicitor Gavin Booth, of Phoenix Law, said that “the events of that evening changed Patrick’s life forever”.

“Patrick was not only physically injured but has suffered every day since with severe Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD),” he said.

“Now almost 33 years later Patrick has been diagnosed with a terminal illness.”

Mr Booth said he has been involved in court action with the PSNI and MoD for over 10 years on behalf of his client.

“While we hope resolution is now close, Patrick deserves justice and some sense of acknowledgement of the wrong that was done to him,” he said.

“This is a systemic issue legacy families are facing and unfortunately many have lost out on justice due to the significant passage of time.

“More needs to be done by all state bodies to ensure justice is done and seen to be done. Patrick deserves his day outside court before it’s too late.”

A spokesman for the PSNI said: “It would be inappropriate to comment while legal proceedings remain ongoing.”

Judge finds Derry man guilty of inviting support for dissident republican faction

JOHN CASSIDY, Belfast Telegraph and Irish News, November 14th, 2025

CHARGE RELATES TO ONH STATEMENT POSTED ON HIS FACEBOOK PAGE

A pre-sentence report has been ordered ahead of the sentencing of a Londonderry man convicted of encouraging support for dissident republicans.

Joseph Campbell (25), AKA Joseph Farren, had denied a single charge of inviting support for a proscribed organisation, namely the Irish Republican Army.

However, Judge Patrick Lynch KC said he was “satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt” that Campbell was guilty.

The non-jury trial at Belfast Crown Court heard that the charge related to a post published on Campbell's Facebook page on June 14, 2020, containing a statement from Oglaigh na hEireann (IRA).

The text on the post read: “The primary consideration of Oglaigh na hEireann active service units while exploring the viability of any operation is the safety of the civilian population in the area. As a result, many actions are cancelled or delayed, greatly endangering the security and lives of our volunteers, because of the proximity of civilians to Crown forces personnel. We therefore appeal for your cooperation and understanding and ask you to stay clear of all Crown force personnel. Signed: Oglaigh na hEireann.”

The post also contained an image of a soldier alongside the slogan “Stay Clear. Isolate the Enemy, Keep Them in Fear”.

A prosecution lawyer told Judge Lynch that the image appeared to be from a historical post.

The prosecution case was that Campbell, of Gosheden Cottages in Derry, was linked to the Facebook page, as it bears his name as Joe Campbell. Other elements of the page were linked to Campbell, the court heard. The profile picture and other posted photographs were of the defendant.

IP address traced to home address

The IP address used to access Facebook on June 14, 2020, was traced to his home address. On November 4, 2020, police seized the defendant's mobile phone from his home and submitted it for examination.

Campbell was arrested that day and during police interviews he made no reply to all questions. Further examination of Campbell's Facebook account showed repeated expressions of support for dissident republicans and the IRA between June 2020 and September 2020. The court was told there was also a quote, purportedly from Dolours Price, which read: “The bodies of informers should be thrown out on the street to put the fear of God and the republican movement into anybody that would choose that form of life.”

This quotation was shared alongside a picture of “British agent Denis McFadden” and a photograph of UDR Lance Corporal Ken Newell, lying face down in a grass verge, with his hands bound behind his back. The court heard that McFadden was alleged to have been involved in an undercover MI5 operation against dissident republicans.

The account also referenced Peadar Heffron, a Catholic PSNI officer who lost a leg when a dissident bomb detonated under his car near Randalstown in 2010 as he travelled to work.

It also shared a statement from Oglaigh na hEireann, which confirmed that the group remained “active and committed to achieving a 32-county socialist republic” through “physical force”. A photograph was also posted on Campbell's Facebook account of graffiti that stated: “IRA here to stay. Informers will be executed.”

Internet searches

An examination of Campbell's phone showed internet searches for “IRA”, “Lyra McKee”, “new ira sophistication”, “peadar heffron”, “South Derry” and “derry ira”.

The prosecutor said Campbell's Facebook posts contained a mixture of “historical and contemporaneous material relating to dissident republicanism and dissident republican activities”.

In his ruling, Judge Lynch said he found that the Facebook account was attributable to the defendant and he posted the “actual impugned post”.

“I am entitled to rely upon the defendant's refusal to give evidence in that whether the Facebook page is, as is alleged, his account and, under this control or not, is an issue of such simplicity that he could readily give evidence that it was not,” he said.

“The evidence satisfies me that the account in question is one set up by, and under the control of, the defendant.”

He said it did not follow that the post itself can be attributed to the accused.

“However, the fact that it appears on his Facebook page and under his name is powerful evidence in itself.

“But in addition, the Crown points to the whole tenor of the entries on the site that have been produced, indicating a fascination, if that be the correct term, with violent republican action against the state in pursuance of a political aim.'”

The judge said he was satisfied Campbell knew exactly what the meaning of the post, and its objective, was.

Judge Lynch concluded: “I find all the necessary elements of the offence have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt and I find the defendant guilty of the offence of inviting support for a proscribed organisation, namely the IRA.”

The court ordered the Probation Board to compile a pre-sentence report on Campbell, who was released on continuing bail ahead of sentencing.

My granny Nora and the value of trusted journalism

MÁIRÍA CAHILL, Irish News, November 14th, 2025

MY granny Nora was an avid reader of The Irish News.

Every morning, she would put on her duffle coat and walk – rain, hail or snow – from her house in Norglen Parade in west Belfast, up the hill past the “Sticky club”, and onto the Springfield Road.

From there, she would battle against the wind, holding onto her billowing headscarf, and walk towards the Spar at the top of the Whiterock Road.

In the middle of the journey, she would bless herself at the little clump of white memorial stones laid in memory of Kidso Reilly, who was shot by a British soldier in 1983.

Through all sorts of incidents – riots, burning buses, and foot patrols coming from Forts Jericho and Pegasus – nothing was going to stop wee Nora from getting her newspaper.

She’d go into the shop to do her “messages” and maybe pick up a fresh bap with the news.

Most days, she’d have a yarn with her neighbours, or with Michael or Anne, who worked for years there.

They’d trade tidbits of gossip, or news from further down the road, or whatever had befallen one of their families.

That human connection was meaningful – more so when my grandfather died and my non-driving granny’s world became smaller.

When she returned from the shop, she would take off her wet coat, put the kettle on, and, like many others, turn to the family notices page, or as we called it, the death column.

Then, one of the neighbours would phone, invariably with a “Did you see who died?” question, and they would discuss the notices and who they came from.

She was an avid newshound, too. She had no internet access to follow the news, so she relied heavily on newspapers and television bulletins. Those were the days.

On Sunday, BBC Director General Tim Davie and Head of News, Deborah Turness, both resigned after details emerged that a Panorama episode had edited a speech given by Donald Trump before the Capitol Hill riots in a way that misled viewers.

Now, Trump – purveyor of fake news on many occasions (remember they’re eating the dogs, they’re eating the cats?) – is threatening to sue the BBC.

Whatever your views about Trump or the BBC, the case has thrown up a multitude of issues, not least for news outlets.

How do we ensure the news we consume is accurate? How would my granny have fared if she hadn’t trusted the television news and this paper?

Why is it important to have standards, so that people who are increasingly getting their gossip from social media reels can ascertain the truth from major news outlets?

That’s why the BBC fiasco is just that – catastrophic for those of us who believe journalism is a public good, not just a content stream.

When a trusted institution like the BBC stumbles – not just in error, but in editorial judgment – it doesn’t just damage its own reputation. It chips away at the fragile scaffolding of public trust that holds our shared reality together.

My granny didn’t have time for spin. She believed what she read in The Irish News because it had earned her belief – through consistency, clarity, and a kind of moral contract between reader and reporter.

She didn’t need a fact-checker to tell her what was true. She had lived through enough to know when something smelled off.

But she also knew when something was worth trusting. That’s a harder call to make now.

We live in a time when people are more likely to get their news from a TikTok stitched with emojis than from a front-page editorial.

Algorithms decide what we see. Outrage outperforms accuracy.

Even the most respected broadcasters are accused — sometimes rightly — of distorting the truth.

And when that happens, the consequences aren’t just reputational. They’re democratic.

Because if we can’t agree on what’s real, how can we agree on what’s right?

The BBC’s mistake – editing a speech in a way that misrepresented its meaning – may seem small. But it plays directly into the hands of those who want to discredit journalism altogether.

It gives ammunition to the “fake news” brigade, who already believe all media is biased, all truth is relative, and all journalists are out to get them.

It makes it harder for the rest of us to know who to trust.

And trust, once lost, is hard to win back.

That’s why this moment matters. Not just for the BBC, but for all of us who still believe journalism can be a force for good. That it can hold power to account and help us make sense of a senseless world.

If you’ve made it this far, I should tell you something else: the second half of this column — from “That’s why the BBC fiasco…” onwards — was written by AI.

I am now reclaiming the rest of my column. But how do you know the difference?

If you didn’t spot it, here’s a lesson with your cup of tea and your bap.

Questioning what you see or hear (and even disagreeing with opinion columnists) is healthy.

The second lesson is this: No news outlet will get it right 100% of the time. But this newspaper will always strive to. And if it doesn’t, it will tell you and correct it.

Why? Because there are lots of loyal readers like Nora out there who depend on it.

In an age when internet technology is advancing and even major corporations make mistakes, that commitment to and connection with readers is paramount.

PLANNED visit by Education minister Paul Givan to Co Down school cancelled after pressure by parents

JOHN MANLEY, POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, Irish News, November 14th, 2025

The Irish News understands that the board of governors at St Francis’ Primary School, Dromaroad decided to call off Wednesday’s ministerial visit at the last minute after a number of pupils’ parents objected.

The objections are believed to have related to Mr Givan’s recent trip to Israel.

Pro-Palestinian protesters picketed the gates of the rural school ahead of Mr Givan’s planned arrival.

However, they were informed by a member of the school’s board of governors that the visit had been cancelled.

The Department of Education  was asked on Wednesday to confirm the visit’s cancellation but has yet to respond. When contacted, the school said “no comment”.

Education minister’s school visit postponed

Last month, the DUP minister joined party colleagues and other unionist politicians on a six-day “fact-finding mission” which was paid for by the Israeli government.

Since the escalation of the conflict in the Middle East following the October 2023 attacks by Hamas, Israel has faced accusations of genocide and war crimes.

Mr Givan has faced calls to resign over his use of departmental resources to promote a visit to a school in illegally-occupied East Jerusalem.

On Monday in the assembly, a majority of MLAs backed a motion of no confidence in the minister, however, its failure to gain cross-community support meant the motion fell.

On Wednesday, Department of Education permanent secretary Ronnie Armour revealed that the minister had received a fresh invitation to visit Israel in the new year.

In a statement posted on social media following the minister’s cancelled school visit, the coalition of pro-Palestinian groups, which included Mourne for Palestine, Mothers Against Genocide, Friends of Palestine Downpatrick and Castlewellan for Palestine, accused the minister of “conducting a PR campaign with Israeli politicians”.

PSNI reveals cost of parade policing after withholding details for a year

GARRETT HARGAN, Belfast News Letter, November 14th, 2025

ESTIMATED FIGURES RELEASED FOLLOWING WATCHDOG APPROACH

The PSNI has released the cost of policing various parades across Northern Ireland after refusing to disclose details for a year.

It finally handed over the data following an intervention from the information watchdog.

The expenditure includes £1,401,765 on the 18 Twelfth parades in 2024 and £44,000 to police an Easter parade by dissident republicans in Londonderry.

The PSNI stressed they are “estimated costs”.

In August 2024, a Freedom of Information (FoI) request was submitted for the cost of policing various parades that year, including loyalist, dissident republican, Orange Order, St Patrick's Day and Pride parades. The PSNI refused the request in October 2024, citing cost reasons.

Police said the time it would take to answer each question would exceed the 18-hour limit on staff time.

The month-long process started over again with a refined request.

Having said that information could be provided, the PSNI then refused to provide a response for a second time.

The case was passed to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO).

Ultimately, the PSNI did release the information, but not before a final attempt to restrict it to two figures — the cost of NI-wide Twelfth and Apprentice Boys of Derry parades.

It was made clear that this would not suffice and the Belfast Telegraph would invite the ICO to make a determination.

Two weeks later, the PSNI agreed that the estimated costs for other parades could be released.

Twelfth is most expensive event

It shows that in 2024, the NI-wide Twelfth parades cost £1,401,765 to police and the Apprentice Boys of Derry (ABOD) August 10 parades across Northern Ireland cost £357,218. In terms of parades specific to Derry, the August ABOD parade cost £117k, Twelfth parades £81k, the dissident republican Easter parade £44k and St Patrick's Day £37k, while the Foyle Pride was the lowest at £12k. The PSNI said it is committed to being open and accountable and answered the vast majority of the thousands of requests it received in the past year.

But it cited various exemptions, arguing that this request would have exceeded the appropriate limit to manually trawl through various databases across policing districts, as the information requested is not held centrally.

The PSNI then complied with the request after its decision was probed by the ICO.

The ICO asked the PSNI to provide details and evidence of its estimate of costs.

The watchdog said: “It is not uncommon for public authorities to find it difficult to provide a reasonable estimate of costs and only when we explain how they need to do this that they are able to provide sufficient information for us to accept that section 12 (cost limit) is engaged.”

The PSNI said it took 23.5 hours to adhere to the request, which exceeded the limit.

The PSNI said: “Resources are allocated to parades based on a range of criteria including the size of the parade, previous policing experiences and the potential for disorder as public safety is a key priority.

“The public can be assured that we are able to deploy a number of different resources in certain situations to keep people safe.”

Earlier this year, the PSNI said the cost of policing parades and bonfires here in 2024 was £6.1m. The bill, which covers the period April 1 to August 31, also includes the cost of policing republican commemorations.