Asked by: Lord Coaker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Northern Ireland Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, what assessment she has made of the potential merits of the early release of Stormont House legacy funding to support legacy inquests.
Answered by Theresa Villiers
Reform is essential if the legacy inquest system is to deliver effective outcomes for families. The current system was never designed to cope with a large number of highly complex and sometimes linked cases involving very sensitive information. I welcome the efforts of the Lord Chief Justice to review legacy inquests. If workable inquest reform plans come forward, serious consideration would be given to their potential merits.
Asked by: Lord Coaker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Northern Ireland Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, what plans she has to encourage foreign direct investment in Northern Ireland.
Answered by Theresa Villiers
The Government continues to work with the Northern Ireland Executive to encourage foreign direct investment with UKTI working in collaboration with Invest NI. Northern Ireland remains one of the most attractive UK regions for inward investment outside of London and the potential devolution of Corporation Tax powers could boost this further.Asked by: Lord Coaker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Northern Ireland Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, what discussions she plans to have with Chancellor of the Exchequer on job losses at Bombardier in Northern Ireland.
Answered by Theresa Villiers
I recently held discussions on Bombardier with the Minister for Small Business, Industry and Enterprise and the Northern Ireland Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment. I will continue to discuss this issue with Government and Executive Ministers.
Asked by: Lord Coaker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Northern Ireland Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, what discussions she has had with the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills on job losses at Bombardier in Northern Ireland.
Answered by Theresa Villiers
I recently held discussions on Bombardier with the Minister for Small Business, Industry and Enterprise and the Northern Ireland Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment. I will continue to discuss this issue with Government and Executive Ministers.
Asked by: Lord Coaker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Northern Ireland Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, what discussions she plans to have with Ministers of the Northern Ireland Executive on job losses at Bombardier.
Answered by Theresa Villiers
I recently held discussions on Bombardier with the Minister for Small Business, Industry and Enterprise and the Northern Ireland Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Investment. I will continue to discuss this issue with Government and Executive Ministers.
Asked by: Lord Coaker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Northern Ireland Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, what recent representations she has had on a public inquiry into events in Ballymurphy in August 1971; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Theresa Villiers
In October 2012, I informed the families that I agreed with my predecessor’s decision not to hold a public inquiry into the events in Ballymurphy. I explained this position when I met the families in January 2013. I considered the families’ more recent request for an independent review panel carefully. On 29 April 2014, I advised the families of my decision against instigating an independent review panel. I do not believe the balance of public interest lies in establishing an inquiry or independent review into the deaths in Ballymurphy in August 1971. I do not believe that such a review would provide answers which are not already in the public domain or covered by existing legal processes such as the inquests.
I continue to receive representations from members of the public, politicians and others seeking further investigation into the events in Ballymurphy and into various other events that occurred during the troubles.
Asked by: Lord Coaker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Northern Ireland Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, if she will make an assessment of the effect of the application of section 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 on the payment of compensation relating to cases in Northern Ireland; and if she will make a statement.
Answered by Theresa Villiers
Section 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 requires the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland or, in relation to most criminal offences in Northern Ireland, the Department of Justice, to pay compensation where a person’s conviction for a criminal offence has been reversed or he has been pardoned on the grounds that a new or newly discovered fact shows beyond reasonable doubt that there has been a miscarriage of justice. The amount of compensation awarded in these cases is assessed by an independent assessor.
Section 175 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 inserted subsection (1ZA) into section 133 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, providing a statutory definition of “miscarriage of justice”. In accordance with this new provision, the Secretary of State will only pay compensation for a “miscarriage of justice” where the new or newly discovered fact (on the basis of which the conviction was reversed) shows beyond reasonable doubt that the person did not commit the offence of which they were convicted. In Northern Ireland this new definition applies in relation to applications for compensation in cases involving sensitive national security information, which applications are determined by the Secretary of State rather than the Northern Ireland Department of Justice.
I believe that this clear definition enshrined in statute makes decisions on eligibility more transparent and less likely to be the subject of legal challenge and ensures (in those cases in Northern Ireland to which it applies) that compensation will only be paid where it is clear the person did not commit the offence of which they were convicted.