---

Northern Ireland

My Lords, I congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Park of Monmouth, on obtaining this debate on situation in Northern Ireland. The gracious Speech made reference to Northern Ireland, saying that the Government,"““will work to bring about the conditions necessary for the restoration of political institutions””." I am sure that that is the intention; we can but hope that it will be the achievement. I should like to pay tribute to the work of the outgoing Secretary of State, the right honourable Paul   Murphy. As Minister and then Secretary of State, he showed an attention to detail and displayed a capacity for patience that was as necessary as it was commendable. I now properly welcome the noble Lord, Lord   Rooker, on his translation to Minister of State at the Northern Ireland Office. It is welcome for two   reasons. The first is that, as we on the Liberal Democrat Benches strongly urged, the prolonged period of direct rule made it highly desirable to have in your Lordships’ House a Minister specifically responsible for Northern Ireland. The noble Baroness the Leader of the House handled the portfolio well and, on behalf of those of us on these Benches, I thank her very much for her work in that regard and her willingness to meet us whenever necessary. However, the likelihood of direct rule continuing to be a protracted affair, as my noble friend Lord Smith of Clifton so often predicted after devolution was abruptly suspended in 2002, requires a dedicated Minister in this House. The second reason why the Minister’s appointment is welcome is his particular talents and style. He possesses an acute political sense and has a famously straightforward approach, both qualities particularly needed in Northern Ireland. I trust that the people of Northern Ireland will relish his qualities. I also extend a warm welcome to the new Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. Some of us have known him a long time. My noble friend Lord Smith of Clifton tells me that he has known him for about 35 years—ever since he was his tutor at Queen Mary College, London University. My scholarly and noble friend is always interested in quality. He claims that it was no doubt his supervision—as well, of course, as Mr Hain’s innate intelligence—that led him to graduate with a brilliant first. We also send our best wishes to the new ministerial team at the Northern Ireland Office in its endeavours to revive the devolutionary settlement. We shall give it our full, although not always uncritical, support. There have been many steps forward, usually accompanied by steps back, in Northern Ireland. We have now had the latest and fifth IMC report. My noble friend Lord Alderdice is on the list of speakers, and I am sure that he is likely to speak about that. What are the highlights and significant developments of which to take note today? It is interesting to go back to the autumn and the negotiations that involved the DUP and Sinn Fein. Many of us speaking on this side of the water have often seen those as the least attractive of the political parties operating in Northern Ireland. On 5 May at the general election, we again saw those two parties somewhat triumphant, with lesser successes to the SDLP and the Ulster Unionists. Is that depressing? Not necessarily. The people of Northern Ireland want to see a proper negotiated settlement and to see devolution return. I think that the problem is that they want the toughest people on their side to do the deal. Nevertheless, they still want an agreement. I shall muse a little. It seemed last autumn that a settlement was tantalisingly close. Was a deal about to be pulled off? Did the robbing of a bank and the tragic murder of two men in a pub stop it, or would it never have happened anyway? I do not suppose that we know. Although the two causes and their leaders are those with whom the Government feel it right to negotiate as the larger parties in Northern Ireland, it will be important to embrace all—the fallen giant of the UUP, the Alliance and the SDLP. We looked at the situation in Northern Ireland in the House perhaps three months ago and had a brief debate on the public finances and the order to approve the Northern Ireland budget. When one looks at finances in Northern Ireland, it is always good to say that underneath are the everlasting arms of the Barnett formula, enhanced by even further resources from the European Union. Those of us on this side of the water who feel that public expenditure well used can be a wonderful thing can only slaver at the resources available, compared to the resources in Yorkshire, for example. It is therefore important that ways are found properly to scrutinise the money and resources available in Northern Ireland. In looking at them, we see that extra resources from the European Union are often placed in the voluntary sector, with the statutory sector receiving the other resources. Because of the temporary nature of the resources available from the European Union, there can be a sudden cliff and no resources are subsequently available. I hope that in the ensuing months and years, thought will be given to the mainstreaming of some of the important work that the   voluntary sector is achieving in Northern Ireland, perhaps with temporary money. Those of us who have expressed an interest in Northern Ireland in this place over the years receive a mountain of literature from agencies in Northern Ireland. I shall highlight a couple. One is the review of public administration, where reference is made to local government, health, education and to other bodies that provide administration and services in Northern Ireland. That review is a huge operation, and it must be right. I am delighted that it is consultation. But it is consultation in the absence of a functioning Assembly in Northern Ireland. In the review document, there is reference to some, but not all, of the considerable number of quangos that function in Northern Ireland and to a reduction in the number of operating agencies in local government. I suggest to the Minister that perhaps it would be important to look at democratising that which is taking place in the quangos and whether some of that   work could be done by local government. Bearing in mind the experiences that many of us have had in England with local government, we should be absolutely certain that any local government review will be right for the future. I worry about increasing the size of local government, and several ways forward are produced in the report, but it is important that we try to ensure that local government in Northern Ireland is the most approachable size. There is also a further document, A Shared Future, which states on its cover that it has been produced by the Office of the First Minister and the Deputy First Minister. Of course, they are not in business. It is all good stuff, and it sets out the way in which people should behave. But that sort of behaviour will not be achieved unless there are people in Northern Ireland committed to it. Indeed, the ““shared future”” must be politically underpinned. Direct rule may be the least unacceptable political option for the moment, until the better solution of a democratically elected Assembly can pick up its rightful responsibilities. It cannot go on indefinitely, and I urge the Minister to consider carefully the well scripted and sensible solutions put forward by my noble friend Lord Smith of Clifton on many occasions, which I look forward to him reiterating again. Northern Ireland’s communities deserve no less.