The recent Times Higher Education article, “‘State-directed’ public history ‘lacks credibility’”, highlights some common misconceptions about the planned public history of British policy during the conflict in Northern Ireland.
The fundamental feature of the public history is that it is not state-directed. The announcement of the project affirms that the aim is to provide “an independent and authoritative examination of the UK government’s policy towards Northern Ireland during the Troubles”. It states that Lord Caine, parliamentary under-secretary of state for Northern Ireland, is “keen to acknowledge the importance of the panel’s independence in conducting their work”. The first sentence of the terms of reference stipulates that the role of the expert advisory panel is “to provide independent advice and guidance” to the historians appointed to the programme.
The importance of academic independence in these documents could hardly be more emphatic. In contrast, I have seen no evidence that the public history is “state-directed”. It is of course true that Brexit, and the manner in which it has been executed by recent governments, has damaged Anglo-Irish relations and threatened the achievements of the peace process. It is also true that the Legacy Act has been opposed across the political spectrum in Northern Ireland. But the public history was established independently of the legacy legislation and in the aftermath of the Windsor Framework. While panel members respect the decisions of some historians not to engage with the project, they have judged that the promise of unrestricted access to archives is likely to transform our understanding of Britain’s approach to the Northern Ireland conflict and its resolution.
Is there any basis for this confidence? What is clear so far is that members of the expert advisory panel will select the researchers according to the usual process of peer review. The members include experienced academics from universities in Britain, Northern Ireland and Ireland, and members of the British Academy and the Royal Irish Academy. I have recently served on appointment panels at the University of Galway and Trinity College Dublin, as well as a number of British universities. As the director of research for the largest history faculty in these islands, a significant part of my time over the last five years has been spent reviewing applications for research funding. Many other panel members have similarly wide professional experience of assessing research applications. The suggestion, made by one critic, that I or any other member of the expert advisory panel would tolerate political interference in the selection of candidates is absurd.
It is also clear that the panel, according to its terms of reference, exists to “offer advice on the overall structure and content of the project”. Once again, I have seen no suggestion, in preliminary discussions with the Northern Ireland Office, or with other members of the panel, that either the framing of the project or the interpretations offered by the researchers will be subject to state direction. On the contrary, the minutes of the first meeting – to be released as soon as practicable – will demonstrate that the independence of the project was stressed throughout. The terms of reference go on to say that the panel’s “primary function is to ensure the accuracy, objectivity and comprehensiveness of the public history”, and it is our intention to fulfil this function.
An essential task of the expert advisory panel is to ensure that academic research will be protected from political interference. Researchers will be appointed by academics who are experts in their fields, not by government officials. The parameters and structure of the research project will be devised by the advisers and the researchers, not by government officials. My hope is that gifted and experienced historians will apply for positions on the public history project, and that those appointed will approach the archival material with open minds, free from state direction and prepared to write an accurate, impartial and comprehensive account of what they find.
Ian McBride is Foster professor of Irish history at the University of Oxford.
