No.

The real and greatest reward, tribute or memorial for the innocent victims and the families of those who have suffered throughout Northern Ireland would be to see democracy, law and order restored. It would be to see terrorism and its representatives removed from their positions as they pollute the democratic process by their very presence in this Chamber and in what is called the peace process. While these people pay tribute to the desire for peace and the need to move things forward, it is always at a price. In the case of Sinn Féin/IRA, it is further concessions.

Their reason for keeping the process moving was that those who were guilty of some of the most heinous crimes - such as those who were responsible for the murder of two policemen, as my Colleague said - would be given a clean slate. They have now been granted an amnesty. There is now a desire and a push by Sinn Féin for a wider amnesty for all those who have been involved in criminality and terror in the past 30 years.

Just outside this Chamber there is an epitaph to Mr Edgar Graham, who fell as a result of the terrorist campaign. The stone that marks his savage murder by the IRA reads

That is a charge to the House today. It is exactly the opposite of what is happening in the process in Northern Ireland. I apologise to the people - particularly to the victims - who had to listen to terrorists talking about how they should deal with the victims of terror. It is an absolute affront and a disgrace.

It is the duty of those Members who believe in democracy, justice and law and order to rid ourselves of that process and put in its place something that will ensure that there are no victims in the future.

I welcome the opportunity to speak on this issue. On 29 January I had a unique opportunity. I joined in Brussels with councillors from all over Europe to form the Confederation of European Councillors. The first act of the confederation was carried out on Sunday 28 January - a cold but sunny winter's day. The councillors joined together in the largest cemetery in Flanders field and assembled around the grave of the youngest soldier to be killed in the first world war. He was a lad of 14 years of age from County Wexford.

I was further honoured when I was asked to lead the act of remembrance. However, the greatest victims of shame and hypocrisy were those who had come from that same county and that same part of Ireland. They publicly wept because, for the first time, they recognised the shame and the hypocrisy of not having respected and honoured their own.

There have also been sad occasions in my constituency on which to report. We have had 97 people murdered. An equal or greater number from outside the constituency were also murdered in West Tyrone. I have also seen the victims of shame. The coffin of a decent, respected Roman Catholic RUC man was being carried down the streets of Omagh, but the Roman Catholic population shunned and boycotted that funeral of one of their own respected families. Therefore there is - perhaps for the first time - a recognition that there is a growing awareness in the Catholic community, and it did not happen on the day of the Omagh bomb when 29 people were killed.

What was different on that day was that the Roman Catholic population of Omagh felt the pain, sorrow and anguish that had been felt in the 97 Protestant households of West Tyrone for 28 years. A colleague, Cllr Joe Byrne, was the first person to come to my home. I was glad to see him, and I could recognise the genuine feeling.

In my constituency office I still attend to families who were given pitiful sums. Thirty years ago a family from Castlederg received £700 compensation. Those families have had to struggle to survive financially to bring up their families and to manage small businesses, farms or their work. I am grateful that the two junior Ministers came to the Committee of the Centre. They have given us their help and support and, so far, they have shown a willingness to listen.

I am rather tired and angered today when I hear the begrudging hypocrisy, particularly from Alban Maginness. There is still a very serious problem. During a Committee evidence session I pointed out that some of the victims expected very little compensation, and one of the witnesses, in a rather condescending way, said that she had been delighted to receive a letter of thanks from the victims' group which I initiated in west Tyrone for a day's excursion that they had enjoyed to Belfast and the Crawfordsburn countryside. I chose not to point out that for three months one of those families had attended loved ones in the Royal Victoria Hospital, from where they also had two of their family cars stolen. They were not just victims in one way.

I also want to mention another raft of victims in the remote, rural area of west Tyrone where the Protestant community is sparse. The small Orange halls and church halls that were used as community halls for social activity cannot now be used because of terrorist threats. Those halls are now run down so that social fabric is also a victim.

At present, I am dealing with several specialised cases, and I am supporting a Manchester law firm that is dealing with people from my area who are termed as suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. Those people received the best medical treatment that was available 20 to 25 years ago. However, while they tried to carry on and run their businesses, stress and trauma continued to debilitate them. They have had to give up their jobs, and they have had financial and domestic crises.

These people are in desperation and need the best we can provide. West Tyrone Voice, a victims' organisation, is going out of its way to take a small group of selected people to an island in Greece. It wants to bring some psychiatric counsellors with them to support these people for 10 to 12 days to help them to recover. Over a long period these people have had to endure deep-seated psychiatric traumas - and that was not first from managing financial affairs or a family - which have become embedded.

Dr Hazlett Lynch, whom I got to head that organisation because of his personal qualities and counselling abilities, is regarded as someone who gives more than adequate guidance and help to those 250 families. The fax that he sent me says it all:

The peace dividend to get down to the victims".

That is a heartfelt plea; the people feel there is a victims' industry but that the genuine victims are not in receipt of the help that they need. This has not happened as yet.

Guarantees that there will be no discrimination against our sector by funding bodies".

Unfortunately, this has been a genuinely held feeling in West Tyrone Voice.

I appeal directly to the junior Minister to take those groups of victims who feel an honest and genuine need seriously.

It was not clear that the Member was coming to the end of his speech, and I was going to give him the opportunity to continue when the debate resumes at two o'clock. However, that will not be necessary.

The House is fairly empty, but I am sure that it will fill up during my speech, not because of what I will say but because people will be returning from lunch.

I am glad that Mr Nesbitt has been here throughout the debate. I have criticised him on previous occasions, so it is only right that I should note his presence today. However, I must apologise, as I have to leave later this afternoon. I would like to stay for the whole debate but I have several appointments to keep.

Mr Poots, you are not usually so gently spoken. I am having trouble hearing you.

Do not worry, Mr Deputy Speaker; at certain points my voice will rise to the occasion.

There are three sources of funding for victims' groups. It is important to bring those sources together in a common, identifiable body where victims can access funding. That has been a problem in the past. Different groups have administered different funds, but victims' groups - and victims who do not belong to groups - have had trouble identifying where to go for support. Some have gone to the Victims Liaison Unit and some to the Victims Unit, but they have been sent from pillar to post on many occasions. It is important to address that issue properly.

I am also concerned that Peace II funding is being seen as an alternative to the money coming from the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister, instead of complementing it. I know that applications have been made for funding during the past year that have not been met - certainly not in full. On most occasions they have received less than half of what was originally applied for. I am worried that we are looking at Peace II as an alternative to Executive funding, as opposed to a means of complementing it.

I welcome the motion, but I do not think that the Assembly or the Executive should be patting itself on the back and saying that we have done a great job for the victims. We have only touched the edges. What we are doing will help, and it is good to be doing something, but we cannot say that we have done a great job and that victims should feel obliged to us.

Is the money truly additional, or will it pay for things that should have been provided by other Departments anyway? I noticed that wheelchairs were included in the list of funding arrangements announced recently. That is a good thing, but the truth is that the Health Service should have provided them. I also noticed that money is going to the Ulster Hospital for a survey on facial reconstruction. Again, should that money not have been provided through the Health Service? I want to raise this issue, as it may apply when the funding is distributed later. I want to ensure that it is truly additional and will not be spent on things that should have been provided by whichever Department it may fall into.

Who funds the victims and distributes the funding? The Northern Ireland Voluntary Trust has already been mentioned. In my experience, district partnerships also fall into this category with their handling of victims' groups. The Lisburn district partnership had to be brought to a virtual standstill to get it to support funding for victims' groups.

The money for prisoners groups could go through on the nod, but if one wanted money for victims, there was a serious row.

The same thing happened when Castlereagh district partnership did not give funding to the victims of the La Mon massacre. That was one of the main incidents of the troubles in that area, yet that district partnership, which is supposed to be representative of the community, was not prepared to give money to a project relating to the La Mon massacre - a project which had the support of the local council and the community in general. I have to say that NIVT has been more willing and appears to have been less thorough when giving funding to prisoners' groups as opposed to victims' groups. What sort of society gives more favourable treatment to murderers than to those who had their loved ones murdered?

Alban Maginness said that the Belfast Agreement addressed the needs of victims, but in my opinion, the Belfast Agreement has exacerbated their needs. Justice was stood on its head, because those who carried out murder, those who planted bombs and those who created destruction in the Province were released from jail without having served time commensurate with the crimes that they committed. As a result, many whose loved ones had been murdered during the troubles here - people who had sat with their heads down and got on with life - said "Hold on a minute. These people are getting early release from jail for crimes that they have perpetrated, and the Government are funding them to help them to get their lives back together. As the people who lost our loved ones and as the people who were injured during the troubles, we are not getting the same treatment." That is why, after the Belfast Agreement was signed, a raft of victims' groups appeared throughout the Province. They saw that funding was available to help people to re-establish themselves. However the funding was not going to those who had suffered during the troubles; it was going to those who had been carrying out the murders, the bombings and the shootings.

In his speech, Alban Maginness did not accept that there is any difference in victims. It is a pity that he is not here; I would have welcomed an intervention from him. There is a very clear difference. Nobody in his right mind would argue that Saddam Hussein was just as much a victim as the Marsh Shiites or the Kurds. Nobody in his right mind would argue that Slobodan Milosevic - and I note that Mr Maginness did not answer the question when I raised it during his speech - was of the same standing as the Kosovar Albanians who had to tramp across mountains after having been put out of their homes. Nobody in his right mind would say that Adolf Hitler falls into the same category as the Jews who were taken to the gas chambers. Nobody in his right mind should be saying that the South Armagh IRA should be equated with the people who lost their lives in the Kingsmill massacre, or that Lenny Murphy should be equated with the innocent Roman Catholics in North Belfast who were murdered by the Shankill butchers. There is a difference between terrorists who got themselves injured or killed as a result of their activities and innocent civilians who lost their lives - people who were shot in the back, who were simply going about their business.

I remember hearing on the news one night that a 19-year-old girl had been shot in Fermanagh. Gillian Johnston was her name. Some time later it was heard on the news that that family got something like £850 as compensation for the loss of that young lassie's life. It would not have mattered whether it was £850 or £850,000 as it would not have brought her back. The joy that the family had from that young girl could never be reinstated. When people see those who have carried out murder being released from jail, being taken by the hand, given money and preferential treatment in housing, and then look at what the victims got, they say "Hold on - something is wrong with this society." There is something wrong with a society that does not treat its victims fairly.

During his speech, Mr Alban Maginness mentioned his proposal for a victims' archive, and I am sure the Member agrees that that is an interesting proposal. I would like him, if possible, to say whether he agrees that a victims' archive can be of use only if it is for victims. If those who created victims are included in the archive, it will be a damning insult to the victims themselves.

The point was well made that those who suffered in the Holocaust would not want to share their victimhood with the Nazis. I am sure that the Member would agree that victims in the Northern Ireland archive should not have to share their victimhood with those who made them victims.

Perhaps Mr Maginness would also address the issue of prisoners' being out of jail. I think he missed the point in his speech - perhaps deliberately - that prisoners get out of jail anyway. Does he agree that people were not complaining about prisoners' getting out of jail, but about the fact that their punishment was deliberately curtailed by the Belfast Agreement? They were therefore not being punished at all for the crimes of which they were convicted.

I thank the Member for his intervention, and I fully agree with him. The man who carried out the Shankill bombing murdered 10 people - nine of them innocent - and I think he served six years and three months. The period was not commensurate with the crime committed, but he was released as a result of the Belfast Agreement.

Can you imagine having an archive that included the people who lost their lives in Loughgall? They were all armed and were out with murder in their hearts and minds. On the other hand, in Lurgan, two young lassies were shot at the shop in Kilwilkie together with the fellow who was walking across the street. Could Lenny Murphy be in the archive, with some of the people he murdered? I do not think that would be acceptable.

The purpose of the video archive is for people to give their stories and to represent the pain and grief that they or their relatives have suffered as a result of the troubles. The people who died at Loughgall had families, and children were orphaned. Are those children and widows not victims of the troubles? Those who died were engaged in terrorist activities, but the result was that their families and children suffered. They are victims, and I suggest that they deserve a place in the archive.

I thank the Member for his intervention. I point out to him that during the Holocaust an archive was drawn up, and it would have been wholly inappropriate to put Adolf Hitler's grandchildren into it - had he had any.

You cannot put the perpetrators of the crimes into the same category as the innocent who died during the troubles. That principle also applies to their families. That issue has to be clearly dealt with. Those who lost their lives during the troubles as a result of terrorism are not in the same category as those who went out to do an honest day's work and lost their lives as a result of the illegal activities of others.

People have said that the prisoners' issue and the victims' issue are separate matters. In reality, the same bodies distribute the money to the prisoners and the victims. In essence, therefore, they are not separate issues. They are not separate issues when people see that more money, in the years after the Belfast Agreement was signed, has gone to prisoners' groups than to victims' groups. Those issues must be addressed.

We are never going to sort out the problem of the victims of the troubles. Money will never sort it out, because money cannot bring back a loved one. However, there are certain instances where money can help. I can think of young people who had to leave school at 16 or 17 to take a job because the father of the house had his life taken away. The mother had three or four other children to rear, so that young person needed to get a job to bring a few extra pounds into the house. They may now want to go into further education because they were denied that opportunity as a young person. That is the sort of issue that should be addressed.

Tremendous opportunities could be created for the victims of the troubles. I thank God that I am not one of the victims. A Republican organisation sought to make me a victim; it attempted to murder my father, but it did not succeed. I would like society - had I been a young person without a father - to have treated me in an honourable and respectful way. I would not want society to have placed me in the same category as someone whose father had gone out with an AK47 rifle. I want society to treat victims as people with genuine needs and concerns. The Assembly and the Executive of Northern Ireland have much to do and learn about this issue, and they need to treat people with the care, respect and dignity that they deserve.

Many Members have said since lunch that they wish to speak in the debate. Should each of them attempt to speak for 15 minutes, there would be no possibility of everyone taking part.

The word "victims" covers many aspects of the past tragic 30 years. It includes innocent people who were caught up in an incident through no fault or design of their own - people getting on with everyday life and minding their own business. It also includes a father, mother or other close relative, now in the twilight of their life, who suffered mental scarring from the loss of, or injury to, a dear one - a son, daughter, husband, wife or other relative. Some victims are civilians, or ex-members of the security services, who suffered permanent injury and/or mental scarring that no amount of compensation can repair.

The term also covers people who, because of their service, had their civilian career prospects damaged. Some were made redundant because employers did not want to take the risk of their business being attacked by terrorists. The farms of some victims had to be wound up or leased out because the father or son was incapacitated or worse. These definitions cover the victims of 30 years of shooting, bombing and other barbarities that the terrorists inflicted upon the community. These are the victims who should take priority in any measures to be formulated by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. The word "victim" also covers many other aspects of our tragic past.

We could describe victims of circumstance as those who were injured during terrorist activity, who were held in protective custody, or who absented themselves - that is, went on the run - from their place of residence. Many of those in protective custody availed of educational opportunities provided by the Government, and their next of kin were able to avail of many financial benefits.

Victims of conscience are those who choose to hold to their beliefs and ideals contrary to the laws of the land. Again, many facilities were on offer to them, but they chose to pursue their agenda of civil disobedience.

These concepts of victimhood cannot belong to the category I first described. As a direct result of the activities of victims of circumstance and conscience, the innocents I spoke of are now victims.

Go raibh maith agat. People often want to rewrite the causes of conflict. It is certain that in the conflict of the past 30 years or more, there were victims on all sides. In a way, that is a very simple message. People are trying to work out some sort of hierarchy of victims and survivors. We are not just talking about people who are dead. Generally speaking, we are talking about people who have survived and who need help. At times we are talking about a generational issue, something which will not just spread to friends and relatives but to children and grandchildren.

The first principle is that all sides were involved in this and everybody is affected by it. We need to take a very basic view of what a victim or a survivor is. A victim is a victim is a victim. It does not really matter to the person whether his suffering is as a result of an action of the IRA, the RUC, the British Army, or Loyalists. The loss of a father or mother is devastating no matter who carried out the killing.

Contributors have mentioned Loughgall. Let me remind Members that not everyone involved in that was armed and that people were summarily executed. They were given the coup de grâce as they lay defenceless on the ground. Let us not get on our high horse about how people died. We could debate this for five or six hours, 10 days or four months. The fact is that if people are suffering and need help, then they should be given help, no matter what part of the community they come from.

I represent north Belfast, an area which has borne the brunt of the casualties over the past 30 years. People there, whether they are Nationalist, Republican, Unionist, Catholic or Protestant, deserve the same respect that Mr Poots is talking about. Respect should not be given in some hierarchical or sectarian way. In the end, we should avoid this categorisation that everybody seems to go for and deal with victims and survivors as they are - people who are suffering and need help. Go raibh míle maith agat.

I welcome the measure outlined by the junior Ministers. As an elected representative for Newry and Armagh, I have tried to give assistance to individuals and groups directly affected by the slaughter campaign organised and executed by the IRA, and Republicans generally, in my constituency. Having listened to their victims' views, I know that money in itself will never ever compensate for the loss they have endured and the great suffering they have had to undergo. Our treatment of innocent victims should be a top priority for the Executive and the Assembly.

I am interested in the remarks of Mr Gerry Kelly, the Member for North Belfast, who has himself received many thousands of pounds in compensation for his perhaps questionable activities. He has certainly fared significantly better than many - [Interruption]

On a point of order, Mr Deputy Speaker. Since he is making accusations, will the Member say what those questionable activities are?

That is not really a point of order.

Mr Kelly has received amounts greater than any award made to any of my constituents who have lost husbands, wives, children and loved ones.

Does the Member agree that many victims will take it as a great insult that anyone should come to this House who, in the past, ensured not only that there were victims, but that the place where the victims were to get justice was destroyed by bomb attacks? For such a person to come and lecture people on victimhood sticks very thick in their throats.

I take the Member's point.

Many innocent victims throughout Northern Ireland are only now beginning to unlock the grief that has been in their hearts and stored up in their homes and families over many years. We should remember that, in the light of the ongoing political and peace processes, recent years have been particularly painful. People have shown remarkable courage in bearing their pain and in the quiet and extremely dignified way in which they have gone about rebuilding their lives, without any assistance from Government. They have had to rely on members of their family, neighbours, friends and local communities such as churches to help them to readjust their lives after their great loss.

It has already been said today that there is a clear distinction between the innocent victims of terrorism and those who, in any way, went out and planned or premeditated murder, or who died as a result of their own illegal deeds. That is a very clear distinction in the minds of most decent people.

We should consider ring-fencing the Peace II money for the real victims of terrorism. We should establish a victims' commission, in line with the views expressed by Sir Kenneth Bloomfield in his report. I will be interested to hear in the winding-up speeches whether or not that can and will be taken on board by the Ministers. That could unlock much needed finance to victims' groups that are being established or are up and running. Those groups are facing real staffing difficulties and difficulties in ensuring that they have the counsellors to give advice, support and help to the people who need it.

A clear programme of trained project officers should be set in place to help victims' groups and individuals to apply for funding and help. It should cover everyone: those who lost loved ones, those who were caught up in explosions or events, and those whose lives have been considerably changed because of the trauma involved.

Does the Member agree that if such a commission were set up, it would be very important that those involved in its work shared an understanding of victims, contrary to that displayed by Mr Maginness, whose comments were an offence to the sensibilities of decent people in Northern Ireland?

I am grateful to the Member for his intervention, and I accept his point. The recent announcement of increased compensation payments for RUC widows is a welcome step, which is long overdue. A proper compensation scheme also needs to be introduced for other security force members - those of the UDR, the RIR and the regular Army - so that those who wore a uniform on behalf of the people of Northern Ireland will be properly recognised for the service they have given and the sacrifices they have made.

There is a clear disparity between the funds provided for groups representing ex-paramilitary prisoners and the funding for groups that represent innocent victims. Recently, I was alarmed to read a public statement by a senior director of the Northern Ireland Voluntary Trust, who at the launch of a report, 'The Cost of Imprisonment', said

A statement of that nature needs to be clarified, and those in a public position who distribute grants -

It is ironic that we should talk about people in public positions who disperse grants, given that this morning the Public Accounts Committee held a press conference on the distribution of European grants and their mishandling by Departments. The Irish Sport Horse Genetic Testing Unit Limited in Fermanagh received about £3 million. Why are such points on the handling of European money not brought to the Floor of this House?

We are straying from the subject of the debate.

Given Ms Morrice's background and her undoubted connection with the Northern Ireland Voluntary Trust, I will not make any comparison with the case that she raised. The Public Accounts Committee is effectively dealing with the matter she raised, as it deals with other issues.

We are debating victims and European funding. The public servant's public remarks are, in my view, wholly inappropriate in that they highlight, in some way, a supposed contribution to society by "prisoners of war". In reality, most decent people are of the opinion that had it not been for the actions of those selfsame POWs, much misery and suffering could have been avoided.

We hear many requests for public inquiries into various cases. However, many of the victims who regularly talk to me highlight the fact that neither their loved one nor his sacrifice is ever mentioned. We appear to be in danger of remembering set-piece murders or set-piece, large-scale slaughters. Meanwhile, those innumerable people who lost loved ones and family members are being quickly forgotten. That is a huge mistake. An argument could be made for setting up a truth commission to enable us to hear of the deeds that were done in the name of Irish Nationalism and Republicanism and the glorious tales of murders by bloodthirsty killers that were carried out in the name of Ireland.

Mr Kennedy, may I ask you not to stray too far from the subject of the motion.

The Assembly could do worse than to allocate Peace II money to a truth commission or to murder inquiries, especially into murders in my constituency.

Given that other countries can bring vicious criminals before war crimes tribunals, does the Member agree that money should be set aside to examine the activities of the leaders of terrorist organisations in Northern Ireland to see whether charges could be brought against them?

We are straying from the motion.

If inquiries were established into some atrocities, they would seriously damage the reputation of people who present themselves on the world's stage as peace players.

We welcome the announcement on European funding. We want the money to be spent wisely and properly. The First Minister and the Deputy First Minister must give an assurance that safeguards will be put in place to ensure that the money is spent in the interests of truly innocent victims. This opportunity must not be wasted. We can never compensate fully, but at least we can give recognition to the sacrifices that have been made in Northern Ireland over the past 30 years.

Mr Deputy Speaker, can you tell the House of your thinking when you came "near" to ruling that Members were straying from the motion when it was suggested that money should be set aside to bring people before an international tribunal? Why is that irrelevant to a consideration of how to address adequately the needs of the real victims of violence in Northern Ireland?

Mr Roche, I am prepared to take up the time of the House responding to a ruling that I have actually made, but I will not waste time responding to a ruling that I might have made. There is a clear distinction, and I would like you to think about it.

I support the motion. Violence has always been an unpleasant part of Irish politics, and violence has victims. For too long, Northern Ireland has had victims. We must work with all our might to sustain the political institutions that have brought peace to our Province so that Northern Ireland has no more victims of violence.

Peace will be the best memorial to the victims - the only memorial worth having. In my view it is impossible to compensate the victims of violence with mere money; that would undervalue their suffering. Monetary compensation is one small way in which we as a society can say to the victims that we understand what they have gone through and what they have suffered. It is one of the few ways in which we can register our feelings for the victims of violence, their dependants and their loved ones. We should offer such compensation humbly, recognising that it is inadequate and, at best, a poor way in which we can attempt to identify with their suffering. The cost of life has always been too great. No amount of money will ever be enough. Therefore I urge generosity in any compensation for victims of violence - nothing less will suffice.

I have listened to many speeches today and, unfortunately, at the end of a debate, there is much repetition. I urge Members to look seriously at the motion. We do not wish for victims of violence. We want to be able to put that behind us, but at the same time we want to let them know that we appreciate what they and their families have gone through.

Many people in this country have thrived because of the conflict - they have that on their consciences. What brings it home is when the door closes at night and you see the empty chair.

I was not intending to speak today, but I felt I had to say something. I served in the Ulster Defence Regiment for 13 years, and never did I see its members step out of line. I had many good friends in the force. One incident that really had an impact on me was when, one morning, my brother left to go to work and a bullet stopped the wireless in his car at 7.50 am. That was one of the longest days of my life. However, he was lucky as he survived the attack; many people were not as fortunate as he was.

About four years ago, my son was beaten up in Banbridge, which is in my constituency. It was not because of anything that he was doing - perhaps it was because I was involved in politics and it was a way of getting at me. I do not want to bring emotion into the debate; rather, I thought that I could play my part - and that is why I stood for the Assembly - to try to eliminate such incidents. I know what we as a family went through and what my brother's family went through. People only understand when they are close to it. I hope that any compensation for victims is spent wisely and that those victims will never be forgotten.

This has generally been a good debate in which most points have been covered. It would be remiss of us not to mention prominent individuals who have given their time, effort and money to support victims and to match Government funding. I am thinking of Peter Lavery, the lottery millionaire, who has not only matched Government funding but has given a large part of his personal fortune towards the support of victims, particularly the children of the troubles. I know that everyone in the House would like to thank him for that.

It would also be remiss of us not to mention the Lavery family and others such as the prominent journalist Jim McDowell and the community activist in east Belfast Mr Sammy Douglas. I know that these individuals have provided a great deal of time and effort as well as moneys to help to support the victims of the troubles.

TOP

<< Prev / Next >>