In spite of the totally unacceptable recent events, there is little doubt that Northern Ireland has come a long way over the past 15 years.

The new Government is fully behind the political institutions that have been established here; we strongly support devolution.

Working with local politicians, we want to build a peaceful, stable and prosperous Northern Ireland in which everybody has a shared future. Northern Ireland’s best days lie ahead.

At the same time as being optimistic for Northern Ireland’s future, however, it is simply not possible to ignore the past.

Thirty years of politically-motivated violence have left a terrible legacy, for individuals, families, and society as a whole.

There can be hardly anybody in Northern Ireland who lived through the Troubles who has not been affected, directly or indirectly, by it.

Over the past three years, in opposition and now as Secretary of State, I have met many victims from all parts of the community, each with their own story to tell.

Their experiences are often heart-wrenching and remarkable. Some have told me that they bear no malice towards those who destroyed their lives — others that they can never forgive.

I have spoken to people who simply want to know the truth of what happened — others who just want to forget.

What this has brought home to me is that there is no single, common experience that is ‘the past’ for everyone, even for those who have lived through the same times.

Indeed, for many the literal meaning of the word does not apply. The past is with them always — when they go to bed, when they get up, with them at work, in the bar on Saturday, or in church on Sunday.

I accept that people have |radically contrasting views on what happened. Sometimes mistakes were made by those serving the state, as the Saville Report so clearly highlighted and we have not shied away from acknowledging that.

But the vast majority of the more than 300,000 people who served in the police or armed forces carried out their duties with immense bravery, restraint, and professionalism.

We owe them an immense |debt of gratitude. They held the line, maintaining law and order, and enabled the peace process to take root.

How do we as a society balance our responsibilities to victims and survivors, with the desire of a great many people to move on?

That was the big challenge faced by the Consultative Group on the Past, co-chaired by Robin Eames and Denis Bradley, which was established by the previous Government.

They were asked to see if there was a way to support Northern Ireland in building a shared future that is not overshadowed by events of the past.

Following the publication of the Consultative Group’s report in January 2009, its recommendations were put out to consultation last year. Today, I am publishing a summary of the responses. Discussion of Eames-Bradley was, of course, dominated by the proposal for a £12,000 universal recognition payment.

This Government does not agree with that recommendation and will not be taking it forward. Such payments would make no distinction whatever between the perpetrators of terrorism and their victims.

We cannot — and will never — accept that.

Politically motivated violence, on all sides, was never justified, and we will not be party to a re-write of history in order to give it a spurious legitimacy. We will not compromise our support for the rule of law.

For all the controversy over recognition payments, the Consultative Group’s report should be seen as an important contribution to the debate about the past.

It raises a number of the key themes and issues that need to be addressed, and I am grateful to Robin Eames, Denis Bradley, and other members of the group for their work.

It is clear from this summary of responses that there are a |dramatically differing range of views on the Consultative Group’s proposals.

Many of the responses summarised today are balanced and nuanced accounts outlining the importance of the proposals; others reflect the understandable emotion that the past generates.

What should be immediately obvious to anybody reading them is that we are still a very long way from achieving any kind of consensus on how collectively we move forward.

Yet, as the Commission for Victims and Survivors said in their advice to the First and deputy First Ministers and me: “An effective approach to the past will be based upon a civic and political consensus.” The responses to Eames-Bradley raise a number of questions.

What is the right process for dealing with the past? Do we need to do more work on building a shared future before actively confronting what are very painful events?

How should we spend the limited resources we have on the past when there are so many pressures on current public spending?

How do we balance investigating the past while ensuring that we effectively police the present and the future?

On one issue, however, we are clear. Following Saville, there will be no more open-ended and costly inquiries into the past at vast public expense. We will not accept a hierarchy of investigations into the past.

Clearly dealing with the past is not a matter for government alone. A shared future — which is the only way forward — must be built in Northern Ireland: it cannot be imposed.

Dealing with the past is a vital part of that. Last week it was shocking to see children younger than 10 rioting in the same streets that saw death and destruction in August 1969.

We cannot see that repeated for generations to come. Simply ‘drawing a line’ is not an option.

I welcome the Belfast Telegraph’s contribution to the debate on how to deal with the past, and I look forward to reading other contributions this week.