“The victims of the British government—whether because of collusion or direct murder by police and security forces—  continue to suffer great injustice. And, now, the British prime minister exponentially adds to that injustice, by —in the words of the moderate Irish News of Belfast—‘talking nonsense.’ (See Editorial below).

Because of its artificial history, undemocratic and sectarian purpose, it was inevitable that the vast majority of British government  victims in Northern Ireland would be Catholics.

However, it is important to remember that when it suited, the British government also colluded in the murder of Protestants—as the case of the late Raymond McCord, Jr.vividly illustrates.”—Fr. Sean McManus  

Irish News Editorial. Belfast. Thursday, May 10, 2018

Many of the killings carried out during the Troubles were inadequately investigated while delays and obstruction on the part of the British government have prolonged the suffering of victims, some of whom have passed away before learning the truth.

In particular, there has been a reluctance to disclose information in relation to killings by members of the security forces. Just last month a coroner ruled that a British soldier was not justified in shooting dead a pregnant teenager, Marian Brown, in 1972. Her family had waited 46 years to be told the truth.

There is no doubt that the focus on the actions of former soldiers has caused deep disquiet among some Tory MPs, who have been particularly vocal in calling for a statute of limitations.

They are entitled to raise issues in respect of their constituents but they are ignoring the wider implications of such a move, which could effectively mean an amnesty for paramilitaries.

The DUP, victims’ representatives, Sinn Féin and the Dublin government have all voiced concerns at such a plan but that did not stop senior Tories putting pressure on Theresa May at Westminster yesterday. However, in an exchange that will do little to inspire confidence among victims and the wider public in Northern Ireland, Mrs. May claimed that the “only people being investigated” are armed forces while “terrorists are not being investigated”.

Such a sweeping generalisation bears no relation to the facts, which show that killings by the army  account for around 30 per cent of the PSNI’s legacy workload, with the majority relating to republicans and loyalists.

It is frankly unacceptable that the British prime minister is so out of touch on this important issue.

Bereaved families are entitled to the truth, not patent nonsense from the head of government.

The failure by Mrs. May’s cabinet to agree on the latest stage of her plans last week was a particularly bad sign, with claims emerging of irreconcilable differences between senior ministers behind the scenes.

Events took an even more dramatic public turn yesterday when foreign secretary Boris Johnson described one of his own government’s key proposals for post-Brexit customs partnerships as “crazy”.

If Mrs. May hopes to retain her authority, it is difficult to see how she can avoid removing any minister who uses such dismissive terminology over an option which Downing Street has stressed remains very much on the table.

Her verdict on Mr. Johnson will be telling,  but the fact that David Davis has already been allowed to stay for so long in his post as Brexit secretary since his appointment nearly two years ago suggests that she is a weak leader.

Mr. Davis caused particular consternation when he casually admitted during a Westminster committee meeting in December that no impact assessments on the implications for the UK economy of leaving the EU had been carried out.

He also repeatedly avoided visiting any section of the Border region which features so strongly in his list of responsibilities,  and  [he]declined to answer even the most basic of questions about related issues.

When he finally and fleetingly turned up at Middletown in Co Armagh last month, journalists were not told until after his departure and elected representatives in the area received no notification whatsoever about the engagement.

Of course, when Mrs May herself wanted to see how the agricultural sector was preparing for Brexit, she went to Bangor, in north Down, in March rather than anywhere in the vicinity of the border.

The prime minister, unlike Mr. Johnston and Mr. Davis, has at least indicated an understanding of the dire consequences which will follow in both parts of Ireland if the protracted discussions with the EU do not produce some form of consensus, but she is struggling to push the debate forward.

Irish government sources were quoted yesterday as suggesting that Mrs. May could yet be forced to seek an extension to the two-year timescale for the Article 50 withdrawal process.

Should that happen, it is her own career, rather than the position of her erratic colleagues like Mr Johnson and Mr Davis, which will be firmly on the line.