Bloody Sunday Inquiry

[7] That morning thousands of people walked the path that the civil rights marchers had taken on Bloody Sunday before 13 were killed,[8] holding photos of those who had been shot.

[8] The report states, contrary to the previously established belief, that none of the soldiers fired in response to attacks by petrol bombers or stone throwers, and that the civilians were not posing any threat.

[8][13][16] Relatives of the civilians who had been killed in Bloody Sunday gave a "thumbs up" to the crowd which had gathered outside the Guildhall to hear the conclusions of the report and to listen to Cameron's apology on behalf of the British government.

[17] Historian Paul Bew, writing in The Daily Telegraph, summed up the length of the inquiry as follows: "It is astonishing to think that when the tribunal, chaired by Lord Saville, began its work in 1998, David Cameron was not even in Parliament.

[19] This view was later echoed by a former paratrooper writing in the Belfast Telegraph that the Saville Inquiry was one-sided and did not reflect events of the day as he experienced them.

However, in December the Court of Appeal overruled the inquiry and accepted that the former soldiers would be in danger from dissident republicans should they return to Northern Ireland.

The inquiry relocated to the Westminster Central Hall in London to hear evidence from former British Army soldiers, who claimed they feared being attacked by dissident republicans if they travelled to Derry.

[23] On 8 February 2008, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Shaun Woodward revealed that the Bloody Sunday Inquiry was still costing £500,000 a month although it had not held hearings since 2005.

[24] On 6 November 2008, the chairman of the Inquiry, Lord Saville, revealed that his report into the events of Bloody Sunday would not be completed for at least a further year.

Shaun Woodward said he had been "profoundly shocked" by the new delay, adding "I am concerned at the impact on the families of those who lost loved ones and those who were injured".

[30][31][32] Shortly before the publication of the long-awaited Saville Report, it was announced that soldiers from the Parachute Regiment would be returning to Helmand in Afghanistan on operations for the third tour in four years in October and commanders believed that the report could cause a "morale-damaging backlash" against the British Army if the reports were not viewed in the context of the violence and chaos that had engulfed Northern Ireland in 1972 and that while there should be no attempt to justify the killing of civilians by British paratroopers, senior defence officials emphasised that the events of Bloody Sunday were "a tragedy which belonged to another era" and should not reflect badly on present day armed forces.

[33] The Bloody Sunday Inquiry generated controversy due to its prolonged nature, mounting costs and questions regarding its relevance.

"Tessa Jowell, let slip on BBC TV's Sunday AM programme that 'the latest estimate... is about £400 million'": an amount labelled by "Downing Street and ministers" as an "'awful' cost":[36] In response to questions about the Bloody Sunday inquiry, Government officials were unable to explain why the cost was more than double the estimates given publicly.

The total of £400 million would have paid for [a year's salary for] more than 15,000 nurses, nearly 5,000 doctors and 11,000 policemen, or 13 extra Apache helicopters for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.